CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BS637 .sir" """"'"""' '■"'"'* „ 3 1924 029 283 863 °"" Overs Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029283863 FIRST SERIES. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY, HISTORIC AND PROPHETIC, CRITICALLY EXAMINED, AND DEMONSTRATED, AND HARMONIZED WITH THE CHRONOLOGY OF PROFANE WRITERS: EMBBACINQ AN EXAMINATION AND KEFUTATION OF THE THEOEIES OF MODERN EGYPTOLOGISTS. AOOOMPANIBD WITH EXTENSIVE CHEONOLOGICAL AND GENEALOGICAL TABLES, FROM THE EARLIEST RECORDS TO THE PRESENT TIME ; A MAP OF THE ANCIENTS ; A CHART OF THE COURSE OF EMPIRES ; AND VARIOUS PICTORIAL ILLUSTRATIONS. ON A PLAN ENTIRELY NEW. Letignedfor the use of Uni/oersities, Colleges, Academies, Bible Glasses, Sahhath Schools, Families, etc. BY THE REV. R. C. SHIMEALL, A MEMBER OP THE PRESBTTEKT Of"hEW YOEK : AtITBOB 0» an iLUmHTATED SOEIPTUKAl ClIAKT ; A ClIAET OF EOOLESIASTIOAL H18TOBT ; DB. WaTTO' SOBmVXlX HiSTOKY, bnlaeoed ; A Teeatise on Feayeb ; End of Fbelaot ; etc., etc. NEW YOBK: A. S. BARNES & CO., Ill & 113 WILLIAM STREET. CORNER OP JOHN STREET. 1867. Sntored according to Act of Congress, in the year Eighteen Hundred and rifty-nmej • By E. C. SHIMEALL, 1 the Clerk's OiBco of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. EENNIE, LINDSAY & CO., 6t^KEDTTPXBI iVD EtXCTBOTTFIHI, t. SI, 83 i 85 Cehtee-Sireet, * NBW YORK. • PREFACE Inquieies into the origin of the world, and of the history of man, liave called into requisition the pens of the learned of every age and nation. Of the ancient pbofanb records which treat of the antediluvian age, are " the old Egyptian Ohro- nographeon," attributed to Thoth, the first Hermes and second king of Egypt; of Hermes Tris- magistis; of Sanchoniathon of Berytus, and Manetho, -who copied from it; of Berosus, the great Chaldeo-Babylonish historian ; the writings of the Indo-Chinese, Confucius ; and the now extinct original works of the most ancient Phcenicians, Grecians, etc. These ancient annals lay claim to a vastly remoter antiquity for the origin of the material universe and the history of man, than that set forth in the Sacred Records. Among the earlier profane postdiluvian historians, the principal are, the works of Manetho, Eratosthenes, Herodotus, Xenophon, Ctesias, and the Jewish historian, Josephus. The later are the " Ohronographia," of Sextus Julius Africanus of the third century after Christ ; the " Ohronicon," of Eusebius Pamphilius, about a century after; the "Ohronographia," of Syncellus, a. d. 800; and the " Canon Chronicus," of Sir John Marsham. From these writings are to be gleaned the chro- nology of history in general, but particularly of that of ancient Egypt. On the subject of uninspired Jewish computations, the principal works are those of Josephus ; of Aquila or Akiba, about a. d. 120 ; of Theodotion, A- d. 178 ; of Symmachus, a. d. 193 ; and of the most modern chronicle of " the Seder Olam Kabba," of the ninth century. The principal Christian ohronographers occupying this field, are Clemens Alexandrinus of the second century, and Origen of the third ; and among the moderns, Soaliger, Hales, Usher, Calmet, Helvetius, Playfair, Jackson, Kennedy, Bedford, Ferguson, Brown, Clinton, Jarvis, Bowen, Bliss, etc. Of the writers on prophetic chronology, are Sir Isaac 'and Bishop Newton, Faber, Maitland, Prof. Stuart, of Andover ; Bickersteth, Brooks, Elliott, Cuninghame, Frere, Bishop Hopkins, of Ver- mont, Dr. Jarvis, Mr. D. N. Lord, and others. In support of the claims of a remoter antiquity in behalf of ancient Egypt, etc., than I that accounted for in the Sacred Eecords, we have the so-called modern science of " Antheopologt," alias, the revival of the theory of the f re-Adamites, aided by Dr. tTsher's " Geological and Paleontological Features of Human History," and Dr. George Morton's System of " Ethnology," together with the " archfeological" and " paleo- graphic" antiquities of ancient Egypt, as set forth in Nott and Gliddon's " Types of Mail- kind." These writers affirm, in direct opposition to the doctrine of the unity of races, as taught in Holy Scripture, a diversity of races, etc. ; so that, " for aught we know," the origin of man " may be thousands and millions of years beyond our reach !" "While, on the other hand, we have Dr. Scyffarth's theory of the '■'•planetary configurations^,'' of the Egyptians and other antique nations, in defence of the superior claims of the chronology of the Qreeh S&piniagvnt over that of the Hebrew version. In view, therefore, of the more than semi-infidel efforts of this school of modern Egyptologists to undermine the authority, in these premises, of the inspired cosmogony and history of Holy Scripture, we have undertaken, in " our Bible Chronology," to vindicate the Sacred Records against these numerous, subtle, and growingly popular assaults; and we claim, through an exposure of their fallacy, to have demonstrated, by an exhibit of the harmony of the authentic profane annals of antiquity with the Sacred Writings, the exact era of human history, from the creation and fall of man, and of our consequent proximate position, in point of time, to the final close of the present dispensation. PREFACE. This has involved, on our part, the necessity of a carefully critical, lahorious, and patient examination of every extant system or theory, ancient and modern, and also of both departments of chronology, the historic and the jpfojpTietMi, which we have prose- cuted, more or less, through a period of at least thirty years of our Bible student-life and ministry. Still, we are fully aware that, on this particular subject of sacred and profane litera- ture, and especially in relation to 'ih.Q projpJielio numbers of the Book of Daniel and of the Apocalj'pse, there exists not only a very wide-spread impression but in the minds of many sincere Christians, both of the clergy and laity, a deeply-rooted prejudice, adverse to the possibility of attaining to any thing that may be entitled to their confidence, in regard to either. Hence the popular plea of the numherless discrepancies to be found among all classes of writers on tliis subject, in justification of indulgence in a spirit of i/ndifferenoe in reference to it. The argument here is, that God has left us to grope our way in total darkness, as to any reliable data, either historic or prophetic, in the premises. Nor can it be denied, that the alleged discrepancies of chronographers in both the above-named departments, have contributed lai'gely to produce these results. Still, allow- ing the plea put forward on this ground, if we can, from authentic sources, account for these discrepancies on the one hand, and correct them on the other — the admitted intri- cacy of the subject to the contrary notwithstanding — then we deferentially submit, that the importance of the subject fairlyentitles us to further indulgence in regard to it. We remark, then, in connection with the claims of those belonging to the school of modern Egyptologists (who, as we have said, allege a vastly greater antiquity for the origin of the material universe, and of the history of man, than that set forth in the Sacred Eecords), two additional circumstances have mainly contributed to produce all the confusion and perplexity which exist in reference to I. The Cheonologt of Histoet. These are : 1. The fact that sacred history, not being given in the precise order of the events as they occurred, has rendered the work of a proper adjustment of its chronology one of great difiaculty. 2. The other fact is, that of the existence of theee diffeeent veesions of Scripture, in whole or in part — the Hebrew, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the OreeJc Septuagint — each of which, though differing in an aggregate of nearly 3000 years in their totals, between the Creation and the Nativity, are claimed by their respective advocates as of egual authority in determining the history of the world. On this subject, it must suffice us to say, tliat (having examined every theory of every -writer of note, ancient and modern, who have occupied this particular field) tliese discrepancies are to be traced, not to the absence of sufficiently reliable dLata in the premises ; but, either to the indulgence of fanciful vagaries, as In the case of the barbai'ous antique nations — the Babylonians, -Egyptians, Phcenioians, Grecians, Etruscans, etc. — or to the want of that careful discrimination, and that laborious. and patient investigation, which the nature of the stibject imperatively demands. In reference especially to the barbarous antique nations here spoken of, the immediate occasion of the call of Abraham seems to have been the prevalence of idolatry in those eai-ly ages of the world. Of those who held intercourse with such as had witnessed and escaped the universal catas- trophe of the flood, we may well suppose that the fear of another such interposition of God's power in judgment would have a strong hold on men's minds. Satan, finding that it would be vain to attempt to eradicate these fears of supernatural agency, succeeded in turning them to his own account, by inducing men to substitute for the true God, whom they traditionally knew, a host of imaginary deities, who began to take God's place in their minds, as the objects of their homage and their dread. The result was, that Satan hi mself as " the god of this world" (2 Oor. iv. 4), under this disguise, became the object of worship. These poor dupes of superstition and idolatry might not know this ; but Scripture tells us, that "the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God." (1 Oor. x. 20.) The history of all this, as to the moral pro- cess by which it was brought about, we have in Rom. i. 21-25. When men had thus almost uni- versally given up God for idols, " God gave them up" to all the well-known horrors of paganism. Three times, in the passage just referred to, we have this expression: Wherefore "God also gave PREFAC] them up," V. 24. " For this cause God game them up," v. 26. " And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind," v. 28. It was, therefore, from amid this mass of idolatry that Abraham was called. When God gave them up to the delu- sions they had chosen, He did not leave himself without witness among men. "And Joshua said unto all the people. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood (i. e., the river), in old time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Naohor ; and they served other gods. And I took your father Abraham from the other side of the flood, and led him through all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his seed, and gave him Isaac, etc." (Josh, xxiv. 2, 3.) We have hence shown in this volume, that though clouds of thick darkness — the night of pagan traditions — scarcely pierced by modern researches, hang over all the rest of the nations, thereby obscuring their history while revealing their existence, m the neighborhood of IsEAEL, all is light. The light of Israel's history is shed on all the nations around them. It is pre- served, too, with extraordinary accuracy, while a few fragments only, scarcely secure from entire oblivion other ancient histories. We have to disentomb the remains of the Thebes and the Nine- vehs to get at the history of their ancient monarchs, and to know their dynasties ; while, by God's providence, that which gives some historic data to the glories of Mizraim and Ashur, confirms, in its details, that of which we have already the minutest particulars in Israel's authentic history. We find, in pictures yet fresh on the lore-covered walls of the country of the Pharaohs, the very kinds of overseers over the Jews making their bricks, of which Moses speaks in the book of Exodus. Modern research has only given the place to those countries, which the Scriptures had already assigned to them. n. In regard to the Cheonology of Peophect, the differences of views among prophetical intei-preters fairly balance the scale when compared with the others. These results, however, are mainly to be accounted for on the following grounds, viz : 1. The alleged obscurity of the prophecies, and of the dates connected with them. 2. The two theories which have obtained among prophetical expositors : ^s<, the LiTEEAL, or that of interpreting a day in prophecy to denote a dm/ ; and second, the MTSTicAi, or that which, agreeably to the law of symbolical interpretation, explains a day to signify a year, hence, called the year-day theory. On this subject we observe, in the first place, that, on the principle that " coming events cast their shadows- before," the peculiar state of the church, and of the world, in every age, and every- where, has awakened within the mind an intense anxiety to know, from the nature and character of " the times and seasons" th,en occurring, what was foreshadowed of the future. And permit us here to say, that in no period of the past will this remark apply with greater truthfulness and force than at the present. The reader, therefore, will take this as our apology for once more occu- pying this particular field of Biblical literature. Further, if precedents are called for in verification of the above statement in regard to the past, take the following from the Old and the New Testament dispensations r " Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the night? The watchman said. The morning cometh, and also the night. If ye will inquire, inquire ye." Isa. xxi. 11, 12. " The disciples came unto Jesus privately, saying. When shall these tilings le ? and what shall ie the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world ?" Matt. xxiv. 3. " Lord, wilt thou, at this time, restore the kingdom to Israel ?" Acts, i. 6. Let it then be admitted, that these questions in reference to the " times and seasons," as adum- brating the events of the future, were enveloped in obscurity, not only in regard to the then present chronological position of the church in the dispensation of God's providence and grace, but of her futm/re destiny, together with that of all nations, for all coming time ; yet, inasmuch as they refer to the condition, interests, and expectations of the people of God in every age, " even unto the end of the world;" so, as we have shown in this volume, there must be some part which it concerns them to know, and to which to give earnest heed at one period, with which they had little or no concern in the former; therefore it is, that the Holy Spirit did not lead them to an understanding of these parts with that clearness as they may be supposed to do when the time oj their fulfilment draws nigh. This, we submit, is evident, if we consider the inspired statement of Daniel respecting the long-closed vision, to wit, that at "the time of tub end," the seal should le hrolcen, to the intent that the wise might understand ''when the mystery of God" was about to be ''finished." So, also, of the " manner of time," which marks God's purposes of judgment against ungodly men, and of mercy to the suifering church in the " more sure word of prophecy," when taken in connection with its celestial and terrestrial "signs." It was revealed in order to indicate ■when the believer was to " look up and lift up his head" in expectancy of his approaching " re- PREFACE. demption." In a word, if St. Paul, in his address to the Thessalonians, could tell them, that though " the day of the Lord coraeth as a thief in the night on the children of darkness ;" yet that, as " children of light and of the day," it " should not so overtake th&m as a thief:" then it follows that God, in his infinite -wisdom and goodness, Tiaa furnished his believing people, in his word, and by his providences, with certain infallible " times and seasons," by carefully regarding which, they may know the proximate position they occupy in the worWs history, relatively to the " time of the end,." The inference inevitable on this hypothesis is, that " the church of God," to which, as " the light of the world," has been committed the great work of its evangelization, can nbvbe ijndbbstand HBE TRUE SPIlilTUAL OONDmOjr, NOK REALIZE UBR EEAL RESPONSIBILITY AND DESTINY, Until, taking her stand on the watch-tower of prophetic observation in these " last times," she is enabled to respond to the call, " Watchman, what of the night t Watchman, what of the night ?" that " the morning" — that morning of her millennial glory spoken of by the old prophets — ''flsjw? also the night" — that night of impenetrable darkness, horror, and despair which await apostate Christen- dom and an infidel world, predicted by St. Paul — " cometh." In reference to the other point, we claim to have fully demonstrated the inadequacy of the lit- eral, or day-for-a-day theory, in its application to the prophetic events with which the symbolic numbers are connected. These events, as verified by history, prove the correctness of the year- day principle of interpretation, by showing the impossibihty of their occurrence within the number of the literal days specified. As it respects the method adopted througliont this work in conductiug our inquiries, we have assumed, as indispensable frerequisites to a settlement of this long-litigated and intricate subject of " Our Bible Chronology," the following points: First. — We must determine which of the two versions, the Hebrew or the Septuagint, is authoritative in the premises. That both cannot be — i. e., chronologically speaking — is admitted on all hands. On this particular subject, we have availed ourself of "a series of papers, read before the Eoyal Society of London, on the criteria for determin- ing in which version of the Iloly Scriptures the original Hebrew compilation of time is contained ; with the eras of corruption, by J. Cullimore." These papers exhibit eight, instances of the mutilation and corruption of the Hebrew text by the Samaritans and Jews, both in ancient and modern times.^ These corruptions, taken in connection with other facts and arguments to the same end, have led us to the adoption of the Hebrew version, or its authorized English translation, as alone authoritative in deciding the several eras of the world's history. The next point : Second. — We must determine whether the Scriptures, independently of the details of its chronology, reveal a definitely fixed and unalterably ^preappointed period, during the interval of which, from the creation and fall to the close of the present dispensation, all the divine purposes in nature, providence, and grace, were to be accomplished. This we have shown to be decided in the affirmative, and that the precise period is 6000 years. The last point : Thvrd. — "We must determine whether the chronology of Scripture, as including the two chains, the historic and the prophetic, either fall short of, or overleap, or exactly fill up, the above interval of 6000 years. By a series of six tabular views, though the combinations all vary in the summing up of the different periods, yet, the same aggre- gate of 6000 years is produced throughout : proof demonstrative, we submit, of the "Mr. Cullimore's theory on tliia subject is, that the differences between the shorter postdiluvian chronology of the Hebrew text, and the expanded dates of the Samaritan and Septuagint versions, as oompatcd from the same era viz. : the deluge, are exactly ooinoident with the difference between the equinoctial precession of 100 years to a degree adopted by the latter from the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, etc., and that of the true, of 71 years. Mr. C, how- ever, applies all his astronomical calculations to the chronology of the ourrent version of Archbishop Usher which places the period of the Nativity at A. m. 4004; which calculations we have thought it unnecessary to alter, notwith- standing—as we have demonstrated in this work— that the 1/rue era of the Nativity places that event in a. m. 4182. Similar results, therefore, will be found to apply to the corrected chronological dates of the common version as" adopted in this work, by counting backward from a. m. 4182, in the same proportion of the intervals as calculated from the true and the false years. In either case, tjie real merits of the question at issue, in regard to the ancient and modern cor- ruptions of tlio original Hebrew version by the parties implicated, remain the same. PEEFACE. correctness of " Our Bible Chronology." The links in the two chains, the historic and the prophetic, exactly fill uf that interval to a year. At a considerable expense of time and labor, we had examined the so-called '■'■ Juhv- lean theory of Mr. Cuninghame and Mr. Frere, in which they claim, by a succession of Jubilees of 49 and 50 years, to verify the correctness of their respective schemes of his- toric and prophetic chronology. Time, however, having proved the fallacy of their deductions, we have decided to omit its insertion in our columns. " Our Bible Chronology" will furnish the evidence of an exposure of the defects of previous wz-iters, a critical examination and adjustment of the Mscrepanoy ux the chro- nology of 1 Kings vi. 1, and Acts xiii. 17-22, and of the conjed/wral dates, etc. The reader will find, in the first column of the first series of chronological tables at the end of the volume, the Scriptural references for every link in the chain of sacred historic chronology, so far as it extends. This circumstance, taken in connection, first, with our adjustment of the discrepancy and the two cmi^ecbural dates, as given under Notes 12, 13, and 14 of this work (see pages 90-96, inclusive) ; and second, with the three chronological stand-points adopted by us in harmonizing the chronology of profane with the sacred annals (see page 98), will greatly facilitate the work of testing the merits of our claims to having " demonstrated" the true period of the world's history from the Creation and Fall. Assuming, therefore, that we have sustained the authen- ticity and inspiration of the Mosaic records against the arguments of those who impugn both, on the one hand, and the claims of the Hebrew version as the only authoritative version in the premises, on the other, any criticisms which " Our Bible Chronology" may call forth, to be noticed by us, must be strictly confined to the two above-named points. In preparing this volume, our endeavor has been, so to popularize the exceedingly intricate subjects of which it treats, as to render it intelligible to the plainest mind. In addition to the map and chart which accompany the volume, we have introduced other pictorial illustrations of subjects which could not be so well explained without them, and among the rest, a number of designs of the prophetic symhols connected with the prophecies of the Book of Daniel, which, though they may be deemed objectionable by some, will be a help to others, especially in marki/ng the particula/r eras when each was introduced upon the prophetical platform, A table of contents at the beginning of the volume, and a fliU alphabetical index of sub- j ects at the end, will enable the reader to turn at once to any of the various topics discussed. Finally, in all that we have written on the subject of this treatise, especially in our intei-pretations and applications of those portions of the prophetic word which we con- scientiously believe to apply to papal Eome, past, present, and future, it is not of the members of that church, as individuals, but of the system, that we have spoken. Of the former, as of all others, " our hearty desire and prayer to God is, that they may be saved." On the other hand, in regard to all merely human productions, we can call no man " Master." However we may respect others for their learning, talents, position, piety, sincerity, and the like, yet it is not the Bible, as explained by a commentator, a bishop, a doctor, etc— though all have their excellencies— but it is the Bible alone, that constitutes the rule of faith of all true Christians. "With our position thus defined, and in reliance upon the divine favor and blessing in the furtherance of our endeavors to awaken an interest in behalf of the subjects dis- cussed in this volume, we shall rely upon the co-operation of every lover of truth, and especially of the clergy, to aid us in our work. On the latter class, more particularly, will devolve the duty either to expose the fallacy, or admit the legitimacy of our con- clusions. Throwing ourself upon their indulgence, with others into whose hands this volume may fall, for any defects of style, we are willing to abide by any decision to which just criticism on its merits, regulated by a spirit of Christian candor and cour- tesy, may arrive. PREFACE. As it respects the subject matter of these pages, it will be found to embrace a discus- sion of every topic in any way connected with the question of " Our Bible Chronology." In addition to 53 tabular views, larger or smaller, interspersed through the text of the volume, at the end will be found a series of tables, chronological and genealogical, sacred and profane, extending over 54 pages, and embracing a much more extended scope, with the advantage of a more convenient form for use, than those of oui* Scriptural and Ecclesiastical Charts, originally published at ten dollars each per copy. We offer an apology to the subscribers of this work, for their disappointment as to the time of its appearance. A two months' sickness, during which the writer was unable to superintend its progress of publication, and other unavoidable hindrances, will account for the delay. It only remains, then, that we commend this volume to the divine care and guidance of Him whose inspired Word it advocates, against the numei'ous infidel attempts of the day to undermine it ; and whose chronologico-prophetic announcements, in their bear- ings upon the close of the present dispensation, it claims to have placed beyond the reach of further controversy. New Yobk City, 1859. DIRECTIONS For verifying fhe claim in lehalf of this Treatise, as a '■'■Self -determining test, historic and prophetic, of the World's Chronology." Admitting, first, that we have successfully advocated tlie Tiigher antiquity of tlie Mosaic Kecords against those who ignore it ; second, that we have proved the Hebrew to be the only autkoritative version in determining the chronology of history ; and third, that we have properly adjusted the difBonlties whicli have arisen from the disorepa/nay bstween 1 Kings vi. 1 and Acts xiii. 17-22, together with the two conjectural dates, etc. ; the reader will please turn — I. To the Scriptural proof, pages 79 and 82, of \h& predetermined period of 6000 years, as the interval during which all the ordinary dispensations of God's providence and grace towards the Church and the Gentile nations, were to be accomplished. Then — II. By adding together the year of the Nativity, A. m., 4182, at the bottom of the Synehronical table of Ancient Sacred and Profane History ; and the year A. D. 1859, at the end of the Synehronical table of the Christian dispensation, which give a total of 5991 years from the Creation and Fall, it brings him within 9 years of the 6000, terminating in A. D., 1868. By consulting the three iailea on page 145, and the iwo tables on page 182, ho will find, that, though made up of different combinations, historic and prophetic, they all result in giving the same total of 6000 years. Finally — III. In proof that the year A. M. 4132, is the true date of the Nativitt, besides that the links in the columns of years of the Egyptian, Babylonish, Medo-Persiau, Grecian, and Eoman dynasties harmonize, to a year, with that of the Sacred, he may select, miscellaneously, any one of the hundreds of combinations of the years A. M. and B. C, in the different columns, and, by adding them together, he will find that they give a corresponding total with the above, of 4182 years. Take, for example, in the column, 1. Of Sacred Chronology, the year A. M. 2088, with B. C. 2049 = 4132. 2. Of Egypt " 2514, " 1618 = 4182. 8. Of the Assyrio-Babylonian. " 8347, " 785 = 4182. 4. Of the Medo-Persian " 8600, " 582=4183. 5. Of the Grecian " 8812, " 820 = 4132. 6. OftheEoman " 8897, " 235 = 4132. and BO of all the others. In conclusion. It will be found that nothing will be gained by the plea that the figures in the different columns of years, vary from those of other chronologists. Those in the department ol Sacred Chronology, can readily be tested by turning to the Scriptural references ; while those of the jPro/ane will be found in accordance with the most reliable author- ities, as coinciding with the theeb stand-points in the column of Egypt, given in page 98 of this work. See also the first series of tables, in the column under the head of Esypt. (N. B. The reader is particularly requested to read the Postsoript at the end of this volumejl POSTSCRIPT. From a certain tone and sentiment, casually expressed to the writer on the subject of the appearance of his treatise on "Our Bible Chronology," etc., at this particular time, he feels himself ■warranted in anticipating an exception as awaiting it, to which, together with the grounds on which It rests, he would respectfully call the attention of the reader. ~ It will be said that the discussion of the subject of Sacred Chronology, in its relation to the ethnological and astronomical theories of the school of modern Egyptologists, at this stage of their developments, is premature ; and that we must await the further discoveries of science in these departments, before we can decide upon their merits, etc. In other words, we are told, substan- tially, that, in as much as there is no reliance to be placed on the dates of the antediluvian and postdiluvian periods of the Mosaic Genesis for the creation and authentic history of man before the time of Abraham, therefore, we must defer, till a later day, to the additional paleographio deciphering of ancient writings, especially the Egyptian, and also to the ethnological or anthropo- physiological structure of the human body or species, and the paleontographieal science of the fossil remains of animals and plants now extinct, before we can verify the truth regarding the sacred periods above indicated, it being on these grounds, that the Egyptological school claim a vastly greater antiquity for the history of ancient Egypt, than that accounted for in the Mosaic records. But, to the above and the like course of reasoning, we deferentially submit, that, if tenable, in as much as it makes the truth of the Mosaic narrative in a chronological aspect, to depend upon the above past and future developments of science, it strikes at the very root of our claims in behalf of the authenticity and inspiration of the sacred records. This we affirm on the ground, that, if the advocates of the above-named theories can produce even one well authenticated fact, demonstrative of (he prior origin of the history and antiquities of ancient Egypt, compared with the Mosaic account of the history of the human race, it invalidate?, as an inevitable consequence, all claim of the Mosaic records to our belief and acceptance, as an authentic and inspired revela- tion from God. We are aware, that such an alternative involves the question of the definiteness and accuracy of the historico-chronological details of the world's origin and progress, down to the period above specified. And it is by some objected, that the Scriptures do not furnish any reliable date for the periods anterior to the lime of Abraham; and hence, that they nowhere place the evidence of their authenticity and inspiration on such an uncertain tenure. But, to this we reply, that — besides the obvious incongruity of admitting the reliableness of " Our Bible Chnmology " for the period between Abraham and the Nativity, while it is denied to that anterior to his time— we positively deny what is so confidently alleged of the indefiniteness and uncertainty of the sacred chronological earlier eras. Both the Hebrew and the Septuagint versions, though dififeiing essentially in the length of the above periods, yet nevertheless supply ns with the links in unbroken continuity, and that too, with an accuracy not to be found in the chronology of any of the profane annals of those ancient times. To verify the truth of this state- 2 POSTSOEIPT. ment so far as it regards the Hebrew version, the reader has only to turn to the Scriptural references, in the first column of the first series of the chronological tables from Adam to Christ, commencing ■with page 184, by which he will discover the unvarying and unparalleled minuteness which mart, throughout, the chrotwlogical links which bind together the historical events of Holy Writ. It follows, first, that, to make the chronological verity of the Mosaic Genesis, for the earlier periods of man's history, to depend upon the developments either of geological or ethnological science, is to ignore its claim upon us as an authentic and inspired narrative ; and second, that, in the fullness of its historical detail of events, and the invariable appendage to them of chronological data, showing when each begun and ended, is to be found the evidence, — though not to the exclusion of other — of its authenticity and inspiration. In the view, therefore, of these and the like considerations, we must demur to the imposing of any necessity upon us, to await further light from the productions of our modern Egyptological savans. It is quite sufficient to our purpose, that, up to the period when we commenced the pre- paration of this work, in May, 1858, — tho materials for which had been accumulating upon our hands during the period of at least thirty years' investigation of this subject, — we were in possession of sufficient data, as to facts, to enable us to test the authenticity and inspiration of the Mosaic records, when placed side by side with them. No scholar, at all conversant with the extensive field of inquiry, can pretend that, at the close of 1857, there was any want of resources from which to educe the great principle brought into antagonism, as we contend, with the Genesiacal account of the origin and history of the human race. The issue pending, lies simply between the evidence of the Scriptural account of the unity of the Adamic race, and the diversity of human races, as advocated by the alleged ethnologico-anthropologioal developments of the Egyptologists. As to the science of palaeontology, relating, as it does, to the fossil remains of animals and plants, and hence falling exclusively witbia the province of the geologistic origin and structure of our globe, it occupies no place in our inquiries. All its speculations on either of the above hypotheses, necessarily relate to a period anterior to the creation of man. And, of the evidence for and against the Scriptural doctrine of the unity of the Adamic race, we have contented ourselves with placing the Mosaic annals in juxtaposition, in a chronological aspect, wiih the archeological and ctlinological theories of the above writers, as demonstrative of the fallacy of their claims in behalf of the antiquity of Egypt over that given ia the inspired Pentateuch. In a word, we were moved to this undertaking from a knowledge of the fact, that as " every new scientific revelation of the past at first appears to be opposed to Scripture," so in regard to the theories under consideration. But, as with the science of geology, so we believe of that of Egyptolog)', that when it should "lay aside its swathing bands, and walk forth in manhood" as it now does, like the former, all its stupendous monumental remains would subserve to confirm the Mosaic verity, by attesting the harmony of the most ancient profane, with those of the Genesiacal fecord!=. This, in the volume now offered to the public, we have proven to be even so. Not so however, with those into whose hands Providence has committed the various stages through which this Egyptological bantling has passed from minorily to maturity. The results of their semi-infidel speculations, to say the least of them, have all tended in the opposite direction. The moral taint of skepticism, by means of their extravagant pretensions, like a poisoned atmosphere has infected the minds of thousands. For years past, the most strenuous and indefatigable efforts have been put forth by men distinguished in the world of letters for their giant intellect, erudition, and scientific acumen, in both hemispheres, to spread this infectious miasma. The book-market has been literally flooded with ponderous folios and octavos, clothed with all the fascinating attractions with which the most exalted casuistry and artistic taste could invest them. And yet, forsooth, we are told that this humble effort of ours, to arrest what we conscientiously believe is calculated to outroot our faith in the authenticity and inspiration of God's Book to man, is premature ! That we must wait further Egyptological developments, etc. ! Ah, let us not forget that it was " while men slept, that the enemy sowed his tares." A city, however strongly fortified, may nevertheless fill an easy prey to the invader, if the sentinels posted on her ramparts are found sleeping on their arms. Unnecessary delay in tho defense of that primeval history of man, the inspired Mosaical POSTSCRIPT. Pentateuch, against evciy a«sault, cannot fail to involve a most fearful responsibilily on the pai . > f those who are " set for its dt'feiiso." Our own conviction is, that there is already a large bah nco sheet against such. Out of complaisance to those interested in the so-called science of ethnological and other developments in those premises, duty has been m«de to yield to expediency, until, already the former hold a decided strategic vantage ground in this contest. But, enough of this. We pass to an exhibit of what we conceive to be the nature of the fasts involved in this issue. In doing this, however, we would simply premise by the way, as a matter due to oursolf, that while no one.sots a higher value, or feels a deeper interest in all that appertains to legilimately authenticated Egyptological discoveries, nor holds in higher estimation the learninT and talents of those whose chivalrous adventures and indefatigable labors have contributed to throw so much light upon the ancient history of that renowned country ; yet we can not do away with the conviction, that the school of mod^-rn E/yptologist*, at least for the most part, presumin-y upon a discovery of the true key for the interpretation of Egyptian hieroglyphics, have been betrayed, unconsciously, we tru-t, into the erection of that into a science, which simply exists in th i form of legendary history. Hence the application by them to the historic origin, literature, ant religion of that ancient race, of those technicalities current in the scholastic- nomenclature of th( day, — archaeology, palaeontology, ethnology, anthropology, etc. Then, further. What merits special notice in this connection is the fact, that the controversy waged amongst Egyptologists themselves, as to what constitutes the true basis for the interpretation of those hieroglyphical inscriptions found on the obelisks, idols, mummy-cases, walls of temples, weapons, household utensils, &c., (fee, has been continued with undiminished ardor and zeal, from the period of their first discoveries down to this hour. It were a comparatively easy t isk to show, — what is conceded by all Egyptologists, — that from the appearance of the "CEdipus ^^ypticus" of the celebrated Father Kircher, a learned Jesuit, published in six ponderous folios in A. D. 1636, down to the time of the renowned Dr. Thomas Young, and the two Ch^mpollions, La Jeune and Figeac, between 1814 and 1831, no reliable advances had been made, cither by the Greeks or Romans, in penetrating the dark mysteries concealed beneath the " Veil of Isis." And, between Dr. Young and Champollion le Jeune, there parsed a long and angry contest, as rivals for the honor of having ^rs< discovered the key for the interpretation of the hieroglyphics, the demotic or enchorial, and the Greek inscriptions, found on the surface of the celebrated "Eosetta Stonk." To " Champollion le Jeune," however, together " with the still more vigorous efforts of modern Egyptologists," has been awarded the honor of having "lifted" the " Veil of Isis," so that " the deeds of the noblest, the most learned, pious, warlike, and civilized race of ancient days," [the Egyptian] ..." have become familiar to all whose inclination has prompted them to read the works which, since 1824, have issued from the press of Europe." And yet, these very learned Egyptological savans, European and American, have left the matter wholly undetermined, as to what constitutes the key, as the basis for the right interpretation of hieroglyphical writing; the disciples of thtf Champollion school, adopting the figurative or sym- bolic theory to that end ; while others claim to have proved the utter fallacy of that theory, by furnishing a key based, not upon the complex and hence uncertain principle of the figurative or symbolic, but upon that of the abbreviated syllabic structure of those hieroglyphical characters. And so, says one of the propounders of this last-named theory, " After the world bad for twenty- five whole years made laborious and fruitless eflforts to turn this [symbolic] system to practical account, Bunscn, in 1845, acknowledged (see his 'iEgyptens Stellung in der Weltgeschichte,' Hamburgh, 1845, L. 320), as well as his friends Lip>ius and Birch, — 'We declare decidedly, that there is not a man a'ive who could read and explain [i. e., according to Champollion's system) any whole section of the book of the dead, much less a historical papyrus' And why not ? All the •rules laid down by Champollion proved to be wrong ; all Lis efforts were made in a wrong direc- tion. His entire [symbolical] system was based upon hypotheses that contradicted histoiy, and upon the deciphering of very short sentences, severed from their connection, which, precisely because they were too short and disconnected, are susceptible of a hundred different explanations. Of such, his whole grammar is full. Had Champollion endeavored, first of all, to decipher the POBTSCRIPr. Roselta inscription, and entire hieroglyphic texts from beginning to end, he would have propounded an entirely different system, that is, the syllabic system." . And hence, during the entire course of these Egyptological development?, there exists a total absence of harmony among the writers of this school, touching those very facts on which they rely for evidence, demonstrative of their claims for an antiquity in behalf of Egyptian annals vastly more remote than those of the Mosaic. Indeed, from the extreme paucity of data to that end, they are forced to the acknowledgment, that in their attempts to " show what Egyptian history really is at the present day," as predicated of the " facts now elicited by the interpretation of hieroglyphical chronicles," — when they come to " spread their canvas to the breeze, and begin their voyage down the stream of time, — fogs and mists preclude a very distinct sight of their - course." " We have," say they, " many shoals to avoid ; and there are many long and gloomy portages, over which we must carry our imaginary bark without knowing precisely the length, or the course of the river. As we descend, we shall find enormous landmarks, attesting the great- ness of their builders, without always telling the age of their existence. We shall steer by them all, noting the relative bearings of each; till, having reached the Obelisk of Hiliopolis, B.C. 2088, the mists will gradually dissipate as we advance ; but the shoals are still numerous, and the current still swift. When, however, we arrive at the stupendous Hypostyle Halls of Karnak, at the temples and palaces of Thebes, and the hoary ' Amunei,' or temple of Amun, about the year 1800 " B. C. ; the passage will be easy and the scenery interesting, for a period of two thousand years, (t. e., down to A. D. 200), "when the hieroglyphical annals cease, and subsequent events are chronicled in universal history." It will here be in place to note, regarding the several eras above indicated, that prior to the year 1800 B. C, the entire history of Egypt — "her ancient inhabitants, ,time-worn edifices, religion, arts, sciences, institutions, learning, language, conquests, dominions," etc., all lay buried in the tomb of impenetrable darkness. Also that, "prior to the year 1 800, A. D., the published notices of the few travelers who had ventured to approach the ancient ruins of Egypt," e. g., Paul Lucas, Shaw, Volney, Siivary, Norden, Sonnini, Pococke, Clarke, Millet, Bruce, and others, " were so confused in description, so ambiguous in detail, so erroneous in attempts at explaining their origin and design, that the fact, that these monuments merited more than ordinary investigation, was the only point on which European savans were able to coincide." Nor is this all. After what we have offered on the subject of archaeological developments in the deciphering of Egyptian hierogly- phics, wo leave the candid reader to his own inferences, as to the actual reliableness of the inter- pretations of the Champollion school, over those of their predecessors, Kircher, the Abbe Tandeau, Jablonsky, Zoega, Chevalier de Paulin, and a host of others. Of this, he may form a tolerably correct idea, from the following description of the difficulties to be encountered in this department, as furnished to our hand by a learned Egyptologist. " The process adopted by modern hierologists, in translating ancient Egyptian legends, is to transpose the hieroglyphics according to their corresponding values in Coptic letters ; the roots are then in general traceable to Coptic lexicons ; but it requires vast erudition, intense study, and long practice to become a translator," etc. Eminently true, this, of the Champollion theory of interpretation, of which (in precise analogy to " the good old theory of spiritualizing " the symbolic imagery of holy Scripture introduced into the Christian Church by Origen) we have treated somewhat at length in our " Examination of the alleged derivation of the Hebrew from Egyptian hieroglyphics," in the second section of Chap. I., in this volume, pages 20 — 24. We quote again from a learned Egyptologist. " It must be allowed," says he, " that on all these subjects," (i. e., archaeology, ethnology, etc., etc.) "however successful the efforts ot antiquaries in the last half-century, to enlighten us with unexpected and almost unhoped-for glimpses of the truth ; yet, beyond a certain epoch " (e. g., the whole period ^rior to the commence- ment of the XVIth Manethonian Dynasty, B.C., 2272), "of which the antiquity is scarcely definable, their lights fail us ; and the origin of letters, with a thousand accompanying questions, is lost in the night of time ; wherein, to use the beautiful words of Bryant, 'These subjects assume the fantastic forms of an evening cloud ; \ve seem to descry castles, and mountains, and gigantic POSTSCRIPT. appearances; but, while we gaze, the forms die away, and are soon lost in gloom and uncertainty.'" No marvel then, that the time for the commenoement of the reign of "Menei," as the first king of Egypt, " cannot be determined within a period of jive hundred years ; " that, in regard to both the pyramids of Egypt and of Ethiopia, " we have as yet no data beyond the evidences of remote and indefinable antiquity;" and, that the number, as also the length of the reigns of the " unplaced kings " in the first XV dynasties, have not, and cannot be determined. Wherefore, then, we deferentially demand, call upon us to do homage at the shrine of Egypto- logical " science falsely so called," by a ^postponement of the advocacy of the Mosaic verity in these premises. Surely, in view of the facts herein thus briefly adverted to (more appropriate, we admit, for a volume than a postscript), even admitting all the additional light that may bo anticipated through the medium of new Egyptological discoveries, would be but to subordinate the authenticity and inspiration of the Mosaic Pentateuch as the primeval source of human history, to the less than rush-light scintillations emitted from the "circumambient darkness," which still envelopes the history of that ancient country. In conclusion, we have only to add, that, in addition to our advocacy of the claims of the Genesiacal records, as the primary source of human history, etc., against those of the modern Egyptological school ; we have furnished the evidence, confirmatory of the Hebrew version, as alone authoritative in determining the Scriptural " times and seasons," or dispensations, appended to that history in a chronological aspect. We respectfully invite the special attention of those belonging to the school of modern Septuagintists, to our series of proofs of the above, as contained in pages 30 and 53 inclusive, together with the answers to objections against said proofs, in pages 54 and 62 inclusive, of this volume. It may afibrd some little aid to that class of writers, who con- template a further enlightenment of inquirers after truth in these important matters. New Yoek, May, 1859. R. C. S. SECOND SERIES, NOW IN COURSE OF PREPARATION, BY THE SAME AUTHOR. DESIGNED A3 A SEQUEL TO "OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY, CRITICALLY EXAMINED AND DEMONSTRATED," ETC. THE GREAT THEOLOGICAL SUBJECT OF THE PRESENT AGE: CHRIST'S SECOND COimC, AS REVEALED IN HOLY SCRIPTURE. IN FIVE PARTS, WITH AN INTBODUCTOKT ESSAY ON THE LAWS OF INTERPRETATION OF THE PROPHETIC SCRIPTURES. PART I. — The Second Coming of Christ, considered as a Doctrine of Divine Revelation. PART II. — An Examination of the Question, Is the Second Coming of Christ past or future ? PART III. — If future. Will the Second Coming of Christ consist of a Figurative or Spiritual, or of a Literal or Personal coming? PART IV. — Under either form, Will that event be Pre-Millennial or Post Millennial ? PART V. — ^If Pre-Millennial, What are the events which are immediately to precede, accom- pany, and follow Christ's Second Coming 3 [N. B. In the "First Series" of these volumes— " Our Bible Chronology, Historic and Prophetic "—we claim to have " demonstrated," that all the prophetic numbers of the Book of Daniel and the Apocalypse, relate to events which were to transpire aiiiAm <» * o« ^ c; i ^1 >i >i ' • 1 • ' • 111 fi i a. * ^ ^ ;5 * % * ^ * § 5S § I I li ' • iI.jL- \ ^ X BR TONS /Jneia. t fajutDK*a GEFiMANS CAULS , ll«'lv<'l Ti Cis;iTj)ijie (l^iiLs VICYON AROOS Tlu-ace THENS-A SPAH TA- THEBES CHINA INDIA II 1 S |>,IM i MACEDONIA Kpirus' . Ktolia TAHTARY Jiui<^|(n4oni^i' r^ I \6McATf(nT»iN'' SWITZCH LAUD [ . PliRTHIANS I I TlOJMAI^r |> iombaAhy lo< ^ I : ' WCSTBIHt tu^'^anT^ I£M^H SfAIN I- onTufiA£'^lIJ~£ .rin'c|i ii /y^wiio/tt '■ • •,'■'!. 1 '■/■ t)' nuu A. i'tnt --,. M.uh n ISARACENS EASTERN f// GREEK TURKS /hfuiau.y J 'ff'i' j ; MauikIiiIii' » I J — 4" — I —3—1 -T' TURKS PERSIANS fsAnAcclis Jn i/rp i7i I /el 1 1 1 Arilh.r EMPIRIB J"- ORZEk miTiiaiiN f ■M.tj jiJjiLjIV HrtHCN, D-^' ,.,:„n EMPIRE ArmentiftUM n'itAttfire.T ^^OPHISvr SHAHS TVRK9 GREEKS iimri f^rnrn awa m l^lm'. CARTHAGE NUMIDIA MAURITANIA ^-- ~ FROM THE — -j^,^ EAR LI E S T^R ECOR D § , SARACEN. r vj^ W" aleira/tjr UfmirfidAr,!; TURKS 'i Tiiiiin A- Trijiuli J ALGIERS^ MOROCCO CANADA I I UNITED 1 I STATES IVi'tirhj^'.* , / Vi-u- Knai.iiKJ I :v/ ^ 76- I .\ iMv Veil U //iitrA |/'/li!>^? I <'iiiiN_vl va j N'lr^iiiia I l>oiii> i.'iM/i .j.vr-* LfllLor llciiiT Swbfrt A Bro». ajFiillnn Si X.V. fen 1 Klori la MEXICO COLOMBIA. /;■/■/■-, /;/■«,„ '^ s PERU ''-] CHILI 3j;1 BUENOS AYRES ^4 BRAIIL /*kl PANIARDS D n c '. 6' Jpirvrfu A.v» •uJwS, II^TRODUCTIOK Chkonology, in its application to history, is the science of time, or the ascertaining the true periods or years when past events or transac- tions took place, and the arranging them in their proper order according to their dates. History, which is a record of the progress of human events in connection with the peopling of the earth, the origin of nations, the rise, revo- lutions, and destinies of states, kingdoms, and empires, and of the Church of God, together with the aflFairs of men in their national, political, civil, social, and religious relations, as involved therein, is coeval with the creation of the first human pair, at the close of the great demiurgic week of the formation of the earth and the hea- vens from chaos by the Omnipotent Cbeatoe, and reaches down to the present time. Chronology is of two kinds, sacred and profane. Sacred Chronology. — This is divided into two parts, the historic and the prophetic ; which last, being revealed under mystic forms, e. g., " seven times," ' " time, times, and the dividing of time," ' " seventy weeks," ' etc., etc., differs from the first in the mode of computing time. This subject will receive due attention in Part II. of this work. Our first business is with the chro- nology of history. For our data in the department of sacred chro- nology, we are entirely dependent on the three following versions of the Scriptures, viz. : the He- brew, the Samaritan, and the Septuagint. But the chronology of these versions each dif- fers from the other, and have given rise to the greatest confusion in determining the true epochs ' Lev. xxvi 13. of the three principal events of sacred history — the Creation, the Deluge, and the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. No other subject in the department of biblical literature has commanded, at the hands of the learned, both Jewish and Christian, more diligent effort and research in its adjustment; and certainly, on no subject have we greater cause for lamentation than over the almost endless varieties of opinion which have obtained regarding it. In Hales' Chronology' may be found 120 different opinions among some 300 that might be given, on the epoch of the creation, dating backward from the Nativity, of which the following extract furnishes an example: I. — On the Creation of the World. BIBLICAL TEXTS AND TEESIONS. Septuagint Computation , do. Alesandrinus. do. Vatican Samaritan Computation . . do. Text Hebrew Text , English Bible Josephus Talmudists Seder 01am Sutha.. . Jewish Computation Idem JEWISH COMPUTATIONS. ■Playfair Jackson Hales . Universal History Chinese Jews .".'.".!. Some Talmudists !'.*.!!*.'.," Vulgar Jewish Computation !!."!!!! Seder 01am Eabba, great chronicle of the world, A. d. ISO. Eabbi Lipman CHRISTIAN DIVINES. Clemens Alexandrinus Hales, Eev. Dr. Origen, a. d. 230 Kennedy, Bedford, Ferguson Usher, Lloyd, Calmet Helvetius, Marsham Melancthon Luther Scaliger TEAES B. 0. 6586 5508 52T0 «3T 4805 4161 4004 5555 5481 5403 4693 5844 4869 4220 4184 40IS 8761 8760 8751 8616 6624 6411 4830 400T 4004 4000 8964 8961 8950 ' Dan. vii. 25. ^ n,. ix. 24-27. ' Vol. i. p. 212, ctseq. 12 INTEODUCTIOlSr. II. — On the Deluge. Septuagint Version Samaritan Text. Englislt Bible Hebro-w Text Josephus Tulgar Jewish Computation. HaleB Usher. Galmet. III. — On the Exodus. YKAES B. 0. 3146 2104 8155 2848 2844 Josepbtis find Hales Usher and English Bible. . , Calmet Yulgar Jewish Chronology. YEAKS s. o. 1648 1491 148T 1812 Alleged Obscurity op Sacred Chro- nology. Now, from these and the like discrepancies of chronologists, the opinion has almost universally obtained among Christians that there is so much of obscurity and uncertainty attendant upon all inquiries into this department of Divine Eevela- tion, and especially as regards the chronology of prophecy, as to put at defiance every efibrt to reach any thing approaching to definite and sat- isfactory results. But, even admitting the above alleged obscu- rity of the Scriptures in these premises ; the question to be determined is, whether the dis- crepancies of chronological theorists are to be attributed to the absence, either of a proper knowledge of the subject involved, and of that carefully critical and diligent application and perseverance which the admitted intricacy of the things revealed absolutely require at our hand ; or, to a defect in the data of the record itself. That it is to the former circumstance, and not the latter, that we are indebted for all the per- plexities and embarrassments that have grown out of previous inquiries into this subject, is the specific design of this work to demonstrate, — as based upon the following propositions, viz. : I. That God, in His infinite wisdom, and FOB THE promotion OF HiS OWN GLORY AND Man's ultimate good, has assigned to the PRESENT constitution OF THINGS IN THIS WORLD A LIMITED AND DEFINITE DURATION ; AND THAT, THROUGH THB MEDIUM OF "THE TIMES AND SEA- SONS WHICH He has PUT IN His own power," He has IMPARTED A KNOWLEDGE OF THE SAME TO His PEOPLE through His Word. II. That this limited and definite dura- tion OF TIME, IN THB PURPOSE OF GoD, WAS TO EMBRACE THE PRECISE PERIOD OF 6000 TBAn?, AND TO INCLUDE THE THREE DISPENSATIONS— Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian— com- mencing FROM the Creation and Fall of Man, AND terminating with the close of the period called "the Times of the Gen- tiles." And, HI. That, as the Chronology of Scripture IS constituted of two golden chains of meas- urement, THE Historic and the Historico- prophetic, both branches are absolutely in- dispensable to a determination of THB TRUE EPOCHS CONNECTED WITH THB DESTINIES OF NA- TIONS, KINGDOMS, AND EMPIRES, AND OF THE VICISSITUDES OF THB ChURCH AND PEOPLE OF God, from the beginning, onward to the PERIOD WHEN " THE MYSTERY OP God" CONCERN- ING THEM " SHALL BE FINISHED." I now only remark by the way, that a due re- gard to the claims of the Bible, as an inspired and authentic record of God's revelations to man, forbids our adoption of the latter hypothesis named above. Its admission would go to im- pugn the infinite wisdom of Him who is declared to know " the end from the beginning, and from ancient times declaring the things that are not yet done, saying. My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." ' It would be a virtual indorsement of the impious sentiment once ut- tered by Diogenes, " either there is no god, or he careth not how things go here below." But, so far from this, side by side with the origin of nations, the rise, revolutions, and fall of king- doms and empires, and the countless miseries produced by the wild nproar, confusion, and commotions, physical, political, civil, social, and religious, that have passed over the earth since the fall of man, is the evidence to be derived from the historic and prophetic portions of Scrip- ture, that the world in which we live is not sl fatherless world ; that He who created it has not left it to the capricious laws of a blind chance ; that there is an eye above — a Father's eye — su- perintending the affairs of nations, and a Father's arm, reaching down from heaven to earth, pre- siding over the diplomacy of princes, the debates of senates, the contentions of armies, the councils of churches, and extending through all the mi- nute ramifications of civil, social, domestic, and individual life, controlling and guiding all to the 1 Isa. xlvi. 10. INTRODUCTION. 13 promotion of His matiifijstative glory, and the security to the universe as a whole, of the great- est good. The following and similar passages, having a direct bearing on this subject, may be viewed as a mirror, held up in the eyes of all nations, to confront the ca\ ils of infidels, and to confirm the doctrine of a national providence ; showing at the same time the subordination and the sub- serviency of all events to the promotion of the welfare of the Church of God. "God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth, and hath deter- mined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation," ' etc. Hence says David, "The kingdom is the Lord's, and he is the gov- ernor among the nations."'^ " He putteth down one, and raiseth up another." ' " By him kings reign, and princes decree justice."'' "Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things ; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone ; that spreadeth abroad the earth by my- self ; that frustrateth the tokens of liars, and maketh diviners mad ; that turneth wise men backward, and maketh their knowledge foolish ; that confirmeth the word of his servant, and per- formeth the counsel of his messengers . ' . . from the rising of the sun even to the going down of the same, I am God, and there is none else : I kill, and I make alive ; I wound, and I heal ; I form the light, and I create darkness ; I make peace, and I create evil : I, Jehovah, do all these things, and none shall stay my hand." * Thus we see that what is usually called the common vicissitude of things — light and dark- ness, peace and war, pestilence and famine, health and sickness, life and death, the errors of the weak, the prudence of the wise, the passions of the rash and headstrong, the shining qualities of the great, the virtues and the vices of mankind, pohtical changes and national revolutions, with all those little pillars, imperceptible to the eye of man, but on which the destinies of empires are made to rest — every thing, in short, which the world calls chance, aecident,fortune, and the like — are all under the control of an invisible and over- ruling hand ; which, without violating the laws of nature, or interfering with the freedom of hu- man actions, renders them all subservient to the purposes of infinite wisdom in the government of the world ; and which purposes, be it observed, are all laid open to our view in the historic and ' Acts xvii. 26. •1 Pvov. viii. 15. 2 Pa. xxii. 28. 5 Dent, xxxii. 1 8 lb. Ixxv. 7. PROPHETIC Scriptures, either in the form of nar- ratives of the past or the events of the future. Yes : that God who issued the divine command to the first created pair, " Be fruitful, and mul- tiply, and replenish the earth," ' and who reissued the same command to " Noah and his sons," as the progenitors of "the world that now is,"' speaking of the latter, has recorded of them the following : "By these were the nations divided in THE earth, after THE FLOOD."* The Dispersion.* It is in place here to remark, that the Divine procedure, in ^^determining the times appointed," and affixing the geographical " bounds of the habitation" of the descendants of the three sons of Noah — Japheth, Shem, and Ham — was regu- lated in accordance with the following remark- able prophecy of the great postdiluvian Patri- arch, as predicated of their conduct towards him, recorded Gen. ix. 20-23 : " And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son (Ham) had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said. Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge- Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem ; and Canaan shall be his servant." * Our space will only allow us to remark in this place, what is worthy of special notice, that the above prophecy has been verified in the history of each of the descendants of Noah, down to this day. While Shem, whose children peopled the vast regions of Asia, is included in the direct ancestral line of Mbssias as the promised seed of the woman, and his multitudinous ofispring are the primary inheritors of the original covenant of mercy as ratified with Abraham, renewed with Isaac, and confirmed with Jacob and David ; and while to Japheth, who settled Europe, was grant- ed geographical enlargement, and his progeny have been admitted to a participation, both tem- poral and spiritual, of the blessings of Shem by dwelling in his tents ; though to Canaan (the son of Ham, who peopled Africa and Egypt) is given the promise of the ultimate removal of the curse denounced against him ; yet how true is it that his posterity, past and present, have been 1 Gen. i. 28. ' Gen. ix. 1, 2 ; 2 Pet. iii. 7. 8 Gen. ix. 19, and x. 82. 4 See Map and Cliart of the Course of Empire, etc. Gen. ix. 24^27. 14 INTKODUCTION. the servant of servants to those of both Shem and Japheth ! I come now therefore to ask : Of what are the inspired records of the Old and New Testaments chiefly composed, but a narrative of the wonder- ful dispensations of Heaven ; — first, and principally, towards the great Semitic race, having Canaan as the territorial centre of their operations ; and second, but subordinately, towards the nations, kingdoms, and empires reared by those of Ja- pheth and of Ham ? Indeed, it is only as the na- tional, political, or other relations of these latter affected the former for weal or for woe, and were through them the recipients of blessing or the subjects of wrath, that they occupy the space ap- propriated to them in the sacred annals. The prophecies respecting all those nations outside of the great Semitic family, and especially those relating to the four principal empires of antiquity — the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, and Eoman — go to demonstrate their subordinacy, in the divine purposes, to it, as the medium of de- velopment of the plan of human redemption un- der the three dispensations, Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian. It hence follows, that history is to prophecy what the woof is to the web. The latter, follow- ing immediately the account given of the creation of the material earth and heavens, and of man, together with his fall, rises in majestic splendor as the star of hope to a perishing world ; and, increasing in brilliancy as time advances, stretches thence through a prolonged period, onward to " the time of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy proph- ets since the world began ;" ' while the former, as " each strange scene" transpires, becomes in- terlaced with the inspired rays of prophetic light, in verification of its truth ; and thus, together, form " A wondrous tissue, like the braided hues Whicli blessed the Patriarch's sight." We may therefore, in the language of Moses to Israel just before he ascended Mount Nebo to die, call upon the reader to " remember the days of old ;" to " consider the years of many genera- tions;" to "ask thy father, and he will show thee — thy elders, and they will tell thee. When the Most High divided to the nations their inherit- ance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the hounds of the people according to the num- ber of the children of Israel." And what is to be specifically noted here, is the following reason as the ground of this arrangement : " For the Lord's portion is his pboplb ; Jacob is the LOT OP bis INHERITANCE.'"' ' Acts iii. 21. ■ Deut. xxxii. 7-9. PART I. CHAPTER I. CHRONOLOGICAL DIFFICULTIES. THE QUESTION OF AN AUTHORITATIVE VERSION. MUST BE SETTLED. WHERE LIES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MUTILA- TING THE CHRONOLOGY OF SCRIPTURE. I HAVE dwelt thus at length on the general scope and design of the things revealed in the Scriptures of truth, in the hope of securing the confidence of the intelligent and pious reader in the sufficiency and infallible certainty of the data therein given, as to all the purposes of a satisfac- tory adjustment of its chronology. That there are difficulties to be encountered in this work is not to be denied. Assuming that there is no defect in the Inspired Record itself, still, besides that the historic portions are not inserted in regular consecutive order, the difficulties attend- ant upon a satisfactory adjustment of Scriptural Chronology have been immeasurably augmented by the existence and use, in the Church, of THREE versions, the Hebrew, the Samaritan, and the Greek Septuagint, each differing widely from the other ; and each again, but more espe- cially the first and the last — the Hebrew and Sep- tuagint — ^being claimed by their respective advo- cates as alone authoritative in determining the matter at issue. The controversy occasioned by these differences, embracing on either side those in the Church most distinguished for their learn- ing, piety, position, and the like, cannot I think but be viewed, under the permissive dispensation of Heaven, as one of the masterpieces of Satanic device in these last "perilous times," designed, " if it be possible," to cheat the " very elect" out of a discernment of the nearness of "the great day of the Lord," -as indicated by the conjoint " times and seasons" and " signs" of " the time OF THE END." For, as the question now stands between the advocates of these two last-named versions in a chronological point of view, the dif- ference in the whole number of years, from the creation to the present time, is as 5991 for the Hebrew, and 7629 for the Septuagint, which equals 1*14:0 years! The settlement of the question of an authorita- tive version, therefore, whether it be the Hebrew or the Septuagint, is absolutely fundamental in the outset. The chronology of one or the other version must be erroneous and false. Of the three versions taken together, it must suffice for the present simply to lay before the reader the differ- ences in the totals of years of each from the Creation to the Nativity : According to tlie Hebrew text, as corrected in this ■work, it is 4132 yrs. According to the Samaritan, it is S8S3 " According to the Septuagint (Dr. Scyffarth), it is 5S71 " It will be seen from the above, that while the Samaritan falls below the Hebrew 249 years, that of the Septuagint rises above it 1740 years. Obviously, therefore, it would be a fruitless task to attempt to patch up a system of chronology out of these discordant elements. Nor, with these differences before us, can we avoid the conclusion, that they must have originated in a systematic corruption and wilful alteration of the original numbers. Either the Samaritan reduced, and the Septuagint greatly enlarged, the Hebrew chronology; or else the Hebrew stands respon- sible for the double sin of augmenting the Sa- maritan, and largely curtailing the Septuagint, versions. The grave question oi responsibility in the prem- ises is confined for the most part to the Hebrew and Septuagint versions. On this subject, Mr. Cuninghame, as a Septuagintarian, positively asserts that " the chronology of the Hebrew text is spurious, and has been altered by the Jews since our Lord's first appearance ;" and argues the purity and accuracy of the Septuagint version, from the "high repute in the church of God of the Seventy Interpreters," of which "the very nature of the duty committed to them of render- ing the Hebrew into Greek," was a sufficient 16 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. guarantee;' and Dr. Scyffarth, in a dozen tjr more different places, charges this act of corrup- tion to " a certain apostate Akiba [a Jew], about A.D. 100," who, he says, "shortened the originjiJ chronology of the Hebrew text by 1500 years, in order to prove that Christ, bom long before the time fixed by the prophets, was a Pseudo-Mes-, siah, and that the Jews might wait 1500 year^ longer for the true Christ," etc.^ On the other hand, in opposition to these state- ments, we afiirm and shall prove, that, besides earlier corruptions, particularly the Samaritan, the difference between the shorter chronology of the Hebrew version and the longer as given in the Septuagint, is to be traced to an intentional and systematic alteration and corruption of the chronology of their own Scriptures, by the seventy translators of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, under Ptolemy Philadelphus, about B. C. 265, to the intent that they might thereby, from a motive of national vanity, raise the chronology of the Hebrew Scriptures to the standard of the alleged antiquity of the sacred records of the Egyptians. The process by which this was effected, will be fully explained in the sequel. CHAPTEE II. THE QUESTION OF PRECEDENCE, AS TO THE OBDER OF TIME, OF THE DIFFERENT VERSIONS, THE HEBREW, THE SAMARITAN, AND THE SEPTUA- GINT. INVOLVES AN INQUIRY INTO THE ORIGIN OF LETTERS AND OF WRITING. The position here assumed, however, being called to encounter many specious objections, and to meet numerous arguments in defence of the Septuagint version, as alone authoritative in deter- mining the truth of our chronology, historic and historico-prophetic ; and, as it is the avowed design of this work to endeavor to set at rest all further controversy on this fundamental question; the reader must allow us such latitude in the premises, as the nature and importance of the subject may require. Trusting, then, that what has cost us many years of laborious research in this extensive field of biblical science, and much careful study for his benefit, may find a compen- ' Chrou. of tlie Jews. Append. II., pp. 97, :01. 2 Soyffarth's Summary, etc., pp. 18, 114, 115, 119, 120, 122, 128, 126, 141, 149, etc., etc. sation in his willingness to peruse what is here condensed in a few pages, I ask him to accompany me in a candid examination of the facts and argu- ments herein adduced in support of our claims. But, as preliminary to a satisfactory solution of the questions at issue, it is necessary in the first place to settle the point a-s to which of the three versions, the Hebrew, the Samaritan, or the Sep- tuagint, has the precedence in the order of time. As to the first and last, it is conceded on all hands that the Septuagint Greek is a translation from the Hebrew. And if the claim of priority is not set up in behalf of the Samaritan Pentateuch over that of Moses, yet many men of name con- ,tend,. that though the present square character of our Hebrew Bibles was used in the time of Ezra, yet that before his time, the Scriptures were written in the Samaritan character ; while on the other hand, it is zealously maintained that the present Hebrew character was originally derived from the Egyptian hieroglyphics, which are claimed to have been of antediluvian origin. These claims, of course, involve the important question of the origin of letters and of writing. And, inasmuch as the difference between the Hebrew and Samaritan characters as numerals, ha^ an important bearing on the chronological questions at issue, on the one hand ; and the alleged origin of the Egyptian hieroglyphics over the Hebrew characters employed by Moses pre- supposes their greater antiquity compared with those of our sacred historian, on the other ; I propose an examination of both these claims : preparatory to which, I would preface my re- marks by what follows. It is evident that the patriarchal fountain whence the historian Moses derived a. knowledge of the facts recorded by him, both antediluvian and post- diluvian, was not based on oral tradition alone, but was associated with an art — the art of wri- ting, by which he was enabled to transmit his thoughts in permanent historic form. As to the question of the primitive origin of letters, so far from according it to that necessity which is the result of human progress from a savage to a civilized state, we place the art of writing among those primeval revelations to man, which his faculties as an intellectual and moral being, and his endowment with the power of speech, very obviously required. The possession of the one, naturally opened the way for the sup- ply of the other. Further : that the invention of letters did not originate with either Moses or Noah, but was revealed to the first progenitor of the race of man, OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 17 Adam, even in the absence of any positive state- ment of the fact in the sacred writings, I claim may be made perfectly clear from the internal evidence of their contents. The hypothesis, that a knowledge of letters and the art of writing were unknown till the time of Moses, for example, would involve the absurdity, that this inestimable blessing had been withheld from the pious patriarchs, while we know that it was enjoyed, though in entirely different forms, by the pagan Egyptian, Phoenician, and other nations ; an hypothesis, the fallacy of which, I think, will appear from the considerations fol- lowing, viz. : First. — In Gen. v. 1, it is recorded, "This is the book of the generation of Adam ;" in which passage reference is made to the hook of genealogy, whence Moses gleaned his account of the descent of the first patriarchs from Adam to Noah. Nor, Second — Is it reasonable to suppose, that the Divine goodness, which guided Noah 'in the construction of a vessel for the preservation of himself and family, etc., from the catastrophe of the universal flood, could have withholden from him a knowledge of the art, which, I contend, was possessed by his antediluvian forefathers. Again, Third — Additional internal evidence of this fact may be gleaned from the records of the Pen- tateuch, and other parts of the sacred writings. Here we find that the five books of Moses bear the marks of a compilation of historic facts, by an inspired writer, from earlier records. " The genealogical and family records of various tribes, that are found embodied in the Pentateuch, bear the appearance of documents copied from written archives. They display no traits which might lead us to ascribe their production to the dictates of immediate revelation, nor are we anywhere informed that such in reality was their origin." Accordingly, as in the passage already quoted (Gen. v. 1), we find a hook of genealogies ex- tant in the time of Noah, So, also, in the Book of Exodus, chap. xxvi. 36, the inscription on the Ephod itself is said to have been written in characters, "like the engraving of a signet" of which, the original type doubtless was the symbolic " cherubims" placed at the gate of Paradise, "to keep the way to the tree life." (Gen. iii. 24.) And, again : in the Book of Joshua (compare .chap. X. 38, 39, xv. 15, with Judges i. 11), a city, afterwards called "Debir," was at first known under the Hbbrew name of " Kirjath-Sepher" which signifies, the City of Letters. This was long before the time of Moses. Once more, and finally, on this subject. The name of Eliphaz is mentioned in Gen. xxxvi. 4, 10 ; and in Chron. i. 35, we learn that he was the son of Esau. Then, in the Book of Job, chap. ii. 11 and iv. 1, we read of an Eliphaz the Teman- ite, as one of the friends of Job, Now, if this latter Eliphaz can be shown to be identical with the former, it will prove that he was a contempo- rary with Job. This I think is clear, from the fact, first, that the name of Eliphaz nowhere else occurs in the Scriptures, except in the passages given above ; and also, second, that Teman, in Jer. xlix. 7, 20, is represented as a province of Edom, the country of Esau, the very country where Job dwelt : for that patriarch was not a Hebrew, but lived in the land of Uz, of which Edom was a district, and originally peopled by the descendants of Esau. It hence follows, that Job, who flourished in the time of Eliphaz, as above, must have lived and wrote his book some considerable time before the period of Moses. I close this evidence of the primitive origin of the art of writing, as illustrating the mode of transmitting the ante and post diluvian facts of sacred history, to the time of Moses, by the two following quotations from the book of Job. In chap. xix. 23, he exclaims, "0 that my words were written ! that they were printed in a hook!" And, again : in chap. xxxi. 35, he says, " that one would hear me ! Behold, my desire is that the Almighty would answer me, and that mine adversaries had written a book !" Further evidence of the use of letters and the art of writing from the very beginning to the time of Moses, would be superfluous. In conclusion, therefore, on this subject, I deem it not out of place here to add, that the form of the letters, on which this divinely revealed art of writing was founded, was the Hebrew character. It is undeniable, that our Scriptures were first written in this character by Moses. In this character, he, as the Great Lawgiver of the Hebrew commonwealth, received the Decalogue on two tables of stone, written by the finger of God, upon the Mount Sinai. Now if, as I have shown, the ante and post diluvian patriarchs were furnished with a divine- ly revealed art of writing, as the name of the city " Kirjath-Sepher," the City of Letters, in Canaan (a country which was settled long before Egypt — see Numb. xiii. 22), was inserted in this 18 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. character, it follows that it had been in use many centuries before the time of Moses. And if one century before, why not from the begin- ning? SECTION I. Examination of the alleged Precedence of the Samaritan over the Hebrew Character. At this point, however, we are. called upon to Motice the two difficulties already alluded to. It jS objected, I. That though the present square character of the Hebrew letters is as old as the time of Ezra, yet that, before his time, the Scriptures were written in the Samaritan character. This opin- ion is derived from the assertion of Jerome, in his preface to the Book of Kings, " that Ezra found other letters, which we still use ; whereas, till his time, the Hebrew and Samaritan charac- ters were the same ;" and the statement of Eusebius, in his Chronicon, "that Esdras col- lected the Holy Scriptures, and, that they might not be mingled with the Samaritans, changed the Jewish letters." These statements, they think, are confirmed to demonstration by coins, said to be of high antiquity, bearing inscriptions in Sa- maritan characters. The fallacy of this pretence, however, will be seen in the note below.' 1 The argument derived from coins may be thus Bum- marily disposed of: " If these coins are genniuc, and there was a sacred and common character in use at the Bame time, those stamped with the sacred character might be shekels of the sanctuary ; the others, ordinary shekels ; and Kircher says (Gymnasio Hieroglyph., p. 97) that some have both kinds of character on the same coin. But we exceedingly doubt the validity of any argument drawn from Hebrew coins, as not one has been seen which did not at once appear manifestly spurious. An intelligent London collector of coins stated that he had never seen a genuine one, and thought, moreover, that a coin called shekel never existed, but that it was a denomination of weight only, like the ounce. Spanheim at first thought them all counterfeit ; but in the edition Of 1706 he says he had since seen some which appeared genuine, yet he de- nies that any of those which have the least pretensions to authenticity are of higher antiquity than the time of the Maccabees, and says the character they bear is that used in civil affairs at that time. The letters are so little like imy known character, that it is dificult to fix on their pro- totype ; it may have been the Hebrew distorted, or they may be barbarous imitations of the barbarous Samaritans. Most of them are gross counterfeits ; many give Moses the ram^s korn, and some have the Vulgate blunder, cornvita esset fades///" Yetlhis very argument from coins has been \,hat most confidently relied on for inferring the superior sntiqiiity of the Samaritan character 1 (Capellna, p. 88.) Before we pass on to a statement of the case as it is, as we are now treating of the chirography of the sacred writings, it may not be devoid of interest to the reader to furnish a description of the materials used by the inspired penmen in writing the sacred volume. Before the invention of parchment, the numerous ancient MSS. which have come down to us prove that the material on which Moses and the Prophets wrote con- sisted, not of the Egyptian linen, in which they wrapped their mummies, and on which they wrote their hieroglyphs, or the rolls made of their rush- papyrus; but of prepared skins, like the "rams' skins" (Exod. xxxvi. 19) with which the taberna- cle was covered. The texture of these skins, being both flexible and durable, admirably adapt- ed them, with care, to last for ages. They were either brown, and written with ink, like the African manuscripts of the present time; or purple, and written in letters of gold, like that from which, according to Josephus, the version of the LXX. was made. The skins generally contained three pages; each page from twelve to eighteen inches long, and from four to six inches broad. They were sewed together, making one long strip, which being fixed to two rollers, one at each end, they unrolled it from the one and rolled it on the other, according to the part of the volume which they had occasion to read ; and they were written with so full a body of ink, that the character retained its distinctness for centu- ries, and would bear repeated washings. On such rolls several of the prophets were expressly directed to write their prophecies. And the pei> fection of the Hebrew character was well sus- tained by the exceeding great care taken in appointing well-qualified scribes, and in subject- ing all the materials employed, and afterwards the finished work, to the most strict examination. The skins, pens, and ink, must all be prepared by an Israelite, for that express purpose ; and if any of these precautions were negkcted, the manu- script was vitiated, and mvist be destroyed. The finished copy must be examined within thirty days; and if three errors were discovered in any skin, it was rejected. Thus, every expedient was adopted to check and exclude the errors of transcription. Besides, these rolls, when the prophecies were not to be fulfilled for ages, were commanded to be sealed up, and carefully depos- ited in cases ; it being required that the origi^nal prediction should be compared with the event, when fulfilled. The following figures will illus-' trate the single and the encased rolls : OUR BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CKITJCALLY EXAMINED. 19 To return now to a statement of the facts of the case, between the Samaritan and the Hebrew. Take the following : ^'^ First, we have the whole Scripture in the square Hebrew, while the Pen- tateuch only is extant in the Samaritan. Sec- ondly, in this fragment of God's word there are innumerable errors of transcription, from inter- changing "1 Raish and t Daleih, i Baith and i Chaph, )3 Mem and o Samech ; changes easily accounted for on the sujiposition that the original was Hebrew, where the letters have much resem- blance ; but utterly inexplicable on the supposi- tion of a Samaritan original, where the corre- sponding characters have no such similarity," as may be seen from the following : Samaritan, Eaish, <\; Baith, A; Mem, /*J; Daleth, C? ; Chaph, *iU ; Samech, -A . " Thirdly. The coins are all of doubtful anti- quity, and on the best of them the characters are so very barbarous, that it is not easy to say whether they meant to imitate the Hebrew or the Samaritan character. But compare the two characters together, and we ask, whether it be probable that the barbarous Samaritan could have been the source whence the grand Hebrew character was derived. That the Hebrew might degenerate into the Samaritan, is a perfectly nat- ural supposition ; but that the distorted Samari- tan could be the source of the simple and regular Hebrew, appears to us a preposterous idea. Moreover, let us see from the Scripture what the character of these Samaritans was. " At the beginning of their dwelling there, they feared not the Lord." ' " Then one of the priests, whom they had carried away from Samaria, came 1 2 Kings xvii. 25. and dwelt in Bethel, and taught them how they should fear the Lord : howbeit, every nation made gods of their own.'' ' " So these nations feared the Lord and ssrved their graven images, both their children and their children's chil- dren ; as did their fathers, so do they unto this day." * Is this the kind of people among whom we may expect to find the original Scrip- tures ? We may grant that, during the Babylonish captivity, the people had forgotten, or much corrupted, their language ; while we maintain that among the priests and prophets, the He- brew was preserved in its purity. It is in place here to notice the fact, that the language of the ancient Chaldeans was a dialect of the Hebrew. This accounts for the circumstance that several portions of our Scriptures are written in the Chaldean character, between which and the original Hebrew there is a resemblance which proves its primitive paternity from that source. The places referred to are, Dan. chap. ii. 4, to the end of chap. vii. ; Ezra iv. from verse 8 to chap. vi. 1-19, inclusive; and chap. vii. verses 12-17, inclusive ; and Jeremiah, putting words into the mouth of the Jews for addressing the Chaldeans, has one verse in Chaldaic, x. 11. At the same time, however, he sent them letters to Babylon in pure Hebrew (Jer. li. 60). Ezekiel, Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezra, etc., all wrote in Hebrew, with the exceptions specified above, together with such parts of Daniel as related to the affairs of Chaldea. The fact that it became necessary to give " the sense, and cause them to understand the reading" of the Law by Ezra (Neh. viii. 8), proves that the language of the people had grown corrupt; but it at the same time proves that the sacred books had not been changed. > 2 Kings xvii. 25. a lb. V. 41. 20 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. SECTION II. Examination of the alleged Derivation of the Hebrew from Egyptian Hieroglyphics. Still, it may be urged tbat there is the ab- sence of su£Bcient evidence in the above, that the sacred square Hebrew character now in use is coeval with the history of man. That evidence, if I mistake not, will be found in what we have to offer in reply, II. To the alleged derivation of the Hebrew character from Egyptian hieroglyphics. — We must here premise, that this claim has originated as a consequence of the singular fancy of certain Egyptologists, in extolling the superior antiquity, religion, learning, power, and glory of that an- cient race. Thus, Dr. Scyffarth : " There is not," says he, " upon the whole surface of' the globe, a land that can boast an antiquity like that of Egypt.'" Speaking of the "general doubt whether, since the days of Adam and Seth, there has been any primeval revelation, which was transmitted through Enoch and Noah," he says, " It is only the sacred books of the ancient Egyptians that have furnished the proof of this."" The inference, of course, is, that the Mosaic records, so far from containing within themselves internal evidence of their authenticity as an in- spired book, are wholly dependent for proof, to that end, on the alleged "primitive revelations of the Egyptians."' We are not, therefore, sur- prised at his affirmation, that in the land of Egypt "the Old Testament had its beginning,"^ etc. Another writer of this school, Mr. George R. Gliddon, formeriy United States consul at Cairo, in a work on ancient Egypt, published in 1843, says, that " to suppose Hebrew to be the most ancient language, and the one spoken by Adam and Noah, and that it was the only language in which histories of antediluvian events were, by the immediate descendants of Noah, preserved, is a matter of opinion, contrary to evidence, and is, at the present hour, an untenable fallacy,"' etc. ; and, speaking of " the divine origin of the belief in the unity of the Godhead, and of his ineffable attributes in the Trinity (Monotheism, mystically developed in triads)," he says : " The existence" of this ''pure primeval creed among the Gentiles is shown by the mythological sys- tems of the Hindoos, etc., etc., to have been the ' Summary, etc., Introd., p. 10. a lb. p. ig. ' lb. p. 61, etc. 4 lb. p] 9. ■ « Ancient Egypt, etc., published by Winchester, N. Y 1848, p. 14. ' ' same, as, thoroughly demonstrable by hicro- glyphical discoveries, is now proved to have been the faith of those initiated in the hierophantic mysteries of the traduced and misunderstood an- cient Egyptians;"' which "pristine purity of Egyptian belief, in ages prior to Abraham's visit," he adds, " attests the primeval piety of the Nilotic family over all contemporary nations, whom we are pleased to condemn as pagans,"' but which " was indeed a country of wisdom, rule, and systematic order, wherein nothing was left to chance"'^ etc. And, in proof that this learaed and zealous Egyptologist does not limit this ." pure primeval creed" of the Egyptians to postdiluvian times, he says : " From Egyptian annals we may glean some faint confirmation of the view, that they either possessed the primeval alphabet, or that they rediscovered its equivalent, from the mystic functions and attributes of the two Thoths — the first and second Hermes — both Egyptian mythological personages, deified as at- tributes of the Godhead,"* etc. But, that they did possess this " primeval alphabet," which, by the way, he aflSrms was given by "Revelation," he says: "To 'Thoth,' Mercury, or the first Hermes, the Egyptians ascribed the invention of letters," i. e., " in antediluvian periods." Then, having assumed that this primitive alphabet was 'Host," he ascribes to "Thoth, Lord of Paut- nouphis," — who was known under the Greek ap- pellation of Hermes Trismegistus, or "Thoth" the second — the " rediscovery of the art of writ- ing,"' etc. Here, then, we have the "eevelation" of the "pure pi-imeval creed," embracing "the doc- trines" of " the unity of the Godhead and the Trinity," and " the immortality of the soul and a final resurrection,"* together with "the inven- tion" and "rediscovery" of the art of writing, etc. — one and all alleged to have been made known first to the ancient Egyptians ! and, con- sequently, that, as " Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians;" "the Old Testament had its beginning" in that country ; the fair infer- ence from all of which is, that the ancient annals of Egypt furnished the only source whence he gleaned the historic records of the Pentateuch ! On this subject, by way of illustration, Mr. Gliddon calls to his aid the following poetic effusion of Mr. R****** K. H*****, Esq., whose views, he ' Ancient Egypt, etc., published by Winchester, N..Y., 1843, p. 15. a lb. p. 29. " lb. p. 20. t Ano. Egypt, p. IB. » lb.— see p. 15, et seq. « lb.— see p. 81. ' Acts vii. 22. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 21 tells us, "are perfectly in accordance with present .higli-cliurch. orthodoxy." ' " What though Moses did write when the world had grown old I The ' wisdom of Eirypt' had then ever long told, That 'in the beginning God creatod' this world, And that every s'wift star from his own hand was hurVd. " Wo will once more repeat, what though Mosos did write, That In the beginning God said, 'Let there be light:* ' All the wisdom' he spalco was but Egypt's old lore ; Thence ho learn'd all he knew, tJiere 'twas taught long before. Though Moses * was learn'd in all the wisdom' of yore, Diospolitan craft, and Ileliopolite lore ; Tet in those latter days, the blind ' wisdom' of man No more saw the spirit of Jehovah's great plan. "The myst'riea of Heaven, through bold divination, Profanely were grasp'd at, and call'd revelation ; When Moses scjonrn'd with the Arabian sage. His ' wisdom' was worldly, like the lore of that age. •' But when Inspiration was vouchsafed him at last. Then the bright light of Truth flash'd full o'er the past; Then mystic Traditions received explanation. The Symbolical page became Bevelation . . . ." " TKe Bierophants." It is therefore no marvel that " philologists, astronomers, chemists, painters, architects, physi- cians," etc., are told that they " must return to Egypt, to learn the origin of language and writing — of the calendar and solar motion,"' etc., etc. Thus we are introduced to the matter of more immediate concernment — the alleged derivation of the Hebrew square character from the Egyp- tian hieroglyphics. Mr. Gliddon prefaces this theory thus : " We can trace the affinities of all known alphabets, by history and by analytical processes, to a very few stocks : but this we do know, that the origin of writing in Egypt is un- known, though it is auctathon, or indigenous ; that, at the very earliest time of which we can find relics, it was the same system as at any sub- sequent Pharaonic period, and a perfect system ; that the antiquity of the art in Egypt surpasses the record of any nation on earth, save in respect to the first chapters of Genesis ; that, if the Egyptians did not invent the alphabet, they rediscovered its equivalent for themselves ; and finally, it would be far more easy to derive all phonetic characters, not excepting the Hebrew (as shown by the researches of Lamb), from the Egyptians, than to maintain that the Egyptians derived their art of writing from any other source but the common primeval revelation, or its remembrance," ' etc. On this passage I have simply to observe, that, to claim in behalf of the Egyptians an antedilu- vian existence — to affirm that to them was re- vealed, in the first instance, a knowledge of the art of letters and of writing — that, when lost, it was recovered by them — and, finally, that it was indigenous to them, etc. ; and then to introduce the clause above, " save in respect to the first chapters of Genesis^' is one of the most glaring sophisms I have ever known. I ask : Were not "the first chapters of Genesis" written in the Hebrew ? and does not the above exception im- ply that they existed prior to the records of Egypt ? How, then, can it be said to " be far more easy to derive all phonetic characters, not excepting the Hebrew, from the Egyptians, than to maintain," etc.? A writer that, out of subserviency to a favorite theory, can thus tamper with the claims of the Pentateuch, or any portion of it, as an inspired record, scarcely merits animadver- sion. We must, however, yield to position what we would have gladly accorded to merit, and pro- ceed to an examination of the evidence adduced in support of the hypothesis under review. Mr. Gliddon finds in the researches of Dr. John Lamb, of Cambridge University, the evidence that the Hebrew alphabet may be traced, letter for letter, to a primitive hieroglyphic ;" the " greater part" of which, he affirms, " are un- questionably Egyptian." In Dr. Lamb's " opin- ion, as in that of many other English and conti- nental Hebraists, the original, and perhaps ante- diluvian, mode of writing was picture-writing, or idiographic, whence all alphabets were subse- quently derived." ' The process by which it is said that the Hebrew square letter was derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics is as follows : " It is affirmed to be a law of phonetic hieroglyphics, that the picture of an animal, a lion, for exam- ple, should give the sound of the letter with which the name begins ; and hence, as the same principle is discernible in the ancient Hebrew, etc., the initial letter for lion, ' Labi,' being that of Li, or L, which in shape, it is said, is only an abbreviation of the figure of a recumbent lion, that being a pure Egyptian hieroglyphic, there- fore the above Hebrew letter must be of Egyp- tian origin." A similar transition, it is contended, is made clear, from the resemblances between the Hebrew letters B, the initial of the word i, Baitk, and the outline of an Oriental house with a flat roof; together with their letters G, a, Gimmel; N, a, Noon; P, B, Phay ; E, 1, Baish; and T, n, Thav ; but particularly in that of Ad, 1, Daleth, and s, Auleph ; of which the following is given in illustration : > Ano. Egypt, p. 81, » lb. p. 81. > lb. p. 15. > Anc, Egypt, p. 14. 22 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 4J i'bb -4 a* SS is ol H na «0 ririt ^i* ..f^ I submit, therefore, whether the above is not rather an illustration of the extravagance to which one's imagination may carry "him. It is built on the hypothesis that, as Moses received his early education in Egypt, therefore, when he ■wrote the Pentateuch, he must have been totally ignorant of any other written character than those of the Egyptian hieroglyphics ; and that these, not exactly suiting his fancy, he taxed his inventive genius (or some one else for him) in transposing them into the present square Hebrew letters ! To show the fallacy of this pretence, it is, I remark, by no means an unreasonable tax upon our credulity to suppose, as already stated,' that man, as an intelligent creature, being en- dowed with the gift of speech,' was also fur- nished by his Creator with a knowledge of letters 9,nd of writing. The sounds of these originally revealed letters must have possessed an initial significance — equally, at least, with those of the Egyptian hieroglyphics. This is evident from the first articulate sound uttered by Adam, viz., AD, ^J*, which signifies "a man^' and also "red earth" out of which man was at first moulded by the divine "Potter."' But we have somewhat further to offer on this interesting subject. Mr. Gliddon is an ardent disciple and advocate of the ChampoUion school, in the interpretation of Egyptian hieroglyphics, the key to which, he tells us, is their figurative and symbolic forms. On the other hand, Dr. Scyffarth claims to have proved the fallacy of this whole theory (and, to our mind, most satis- factorily), by furnishing a key based, not upon the complex principle of the figurative and sym- bolic, but upon that of the abbreviated syllabic hieroglyphics. Hence the key: — It consists of " the general principle, that every hieroglyphic represents the consonants contained in the name of the object of which the hieroglyphic is a pic- ture. As in Hebrew and in other Semitic lan- guages, the vowels were commonly left out of the account." Dr. Scyffarth, in the application of the above key in exposing the fallacy of the ChampoUion ' Seo page 16. » Gen. ii. 19. » Isa. xliv. 8. theory, enters into the subject in detail. We, however, have only space for the following, as connected more directly with the matter in hand. He says : " It is currently maintained that our alphabet was not invented until 1500 years B. C, by the Phoenicians;" that "the hieroglyph- ics of the Egyptians, or the cuneiform character of the Persians, Medes, and Assyrians, were the first of all written characters ;" and that " a great number of Idiomaniacs have maintained that the original language had been the Indo- Germanic, or sort of Sanscrit," etc. But " now," he says, " it has been proved that there have ex- isted an alphabet and books since the time of Seth ;" " that all the above and similar written characters have the Noachic alphabet of twenty- five letters for their basis ;" and, " that all the LANGUAGES IST THE WORLD ARE DERIVED FROM THE HEBREW ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, as the vcry namcs of the antediluvian letters among the different nations, and the language of the ancient Jlgyp- tians, prove."' Then, on the subject of "the Egyptian pa- pyri," the material on which the Egyptians wrote, having divided them into "the three heads of Hieroglyphic, Hieratic, and Demotic or Enchorial writings," he explains each thus : " The word hieroglyphics denotes the sacred character, for the word is formed of lep6g, sacred, and yXv^eiv, to engrave. Hieratic is derived from the word lepevg, priest; and hence the hieratic character that was used in ordinary by the priests. Demotic, derived from the word 6^[iog, people, designates the character in use among the common people. The same charac- ter the Eosetta stone designates as the Enchorial, from the Greek iyx^ptog, indigenous, national. The three different characters or modes of writing grew the one out of the other. The hieroglyphic is the most ancient ; for it preceded the hieratic, by abbreviating the signs, because it required too much time to draw, in every in- stance, the entire images or figures. . . . The demotic character is the hieratic abbreviated and simplified to the utmost," for the same reason as > See Summary, etc., pp. 20, 21, OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 23 the former. This character does " not reach further back than the Vlth century B. C. In what manner the hieroglyphic characters were abbreviated, first into the hieratic and then into the demotic, will be readily perceived upon com- paring the same words and letters when written in hieroglyphics, in the hieratic, and in the demotic character. For instance : "All the three characters are written from the right to the left, as were nearly all the letters of antiquity. Only the hieroglyphics were, for the sake of symmetry, sometimes written also in the opposite direction."' Dr. Scyffarth then proceeds to state, in an- swer to the question, " In what language did the ancient Egyptians write ?" that it was " the Coptic ; for the Copts, the Christian inhabitants of Egypt, are ■ the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, and Coptus is simply the word ^gyptus minus the initial syllable ^, which was dropped in later times." " Now, it has been as- certained," he says, " that the ancient Coptic, which is 2000 years older than the latter, was far more nearly related to the ancient Hebrew, or Chaldee, than any other language in the world ; that a great many grammatical forms, and nearly all Coptic roots, are derived from the original Chaldee. This is not surprising," he adds, "for there was an original language; and this, as can be easily proved, was the Hebrew, which bears so unmistakably the stamp of anti- quity." He then argues, that " experience has shown that a nation will, in the progress of cen- turies, make but a few and unimportant changes in its original language, if it continues to inhabit the same countries, under the same circum- stances, within the same surroundings."" Dr. Scyffarth then alludes to the fact, that during the lifetime of Abraham, who emigrated from Chal- dea to Canaan, "the Egyptians and all the other nations emigrated from Babylonia." But, "these Abrahamidse spoke Hebrew, and consequently, this same language must have been indigenous in Chaldsea ;" a proof, he maintains, that " the ancient Egyptian language must be intimately related to the Hebrew." From this, Dr. Scyfi'arth proceeds to show that all antiquity — the Hin- doos, the Chaldeans, the Phoenicians, Josephus, and others — testify, that while between Adam and Noah alphabets and books existed ; so, on the other hand, " the same nations, and, to specify persons, Sanchunjathon, Berosus, and others, ex- pressly affirm, that the original alphabet was handed down, and newly arranged, by Noah." And then he adds, that " if the Egyptians had cast away this glorious invention of a simple al- phabet, in order to introduce a system of such a Cimmerian symbolic writing, they would have taken an insane backward stride, and put non- sense in the place of sense." The above statement, it is to be borne in mind, relates not to the letters themselves, but to a new arrangement of them. It is not pretended by any one that the Egyptians adopted, unaltered, the Hebrew characters as transmitted by the Father of the new world. " The alphabet in its original form, as handed down by hinj, comprised, as a comparison of all the ancient alphabets shows, twenty-five letters with seven vowels, and began with a, b, c, and-so on. The same alpha- bet formed, as Plutarch and others affirm, the ba- sis of the hieroglyphics ; for the ancient Egyptians also had an alphabet of only twenty-five letters, inclusive of seven vowels, and their alphabet be- gan with a, precisely as the Hebrew, the Greek, etc., in short, all the alphabets of antiquity." . . . " Surely then the Egyptians might also, with the aid of the twenty-five articulate sounds, have in- vented a method of syllabic writing ; and that such is the case has now been fully ascertained," " An invention of this kind was, moreover, the most simple, and the most likely to suggest itself. In the Noachian alphabet, each pictured letter represents the sound with which the name of the picture commences. The letter a, baith, e, g., is the picture of a bushel measure, which the He- brews called Bath ; it therefore stands for B, be- cause the name of the picture begins with that consonant. And now, in order to obtain for the temple-walls, obelisks, stelae, and the purposes of writing in general, a shorter written character, it was determined to represent by the picture of the measure called Bath both the consonants which the name of that measure contains, and therefore to adopt the picture of the Bath- measure to designate the syllable BT. The same remarks are applicable to many other Hebrew letters, which the Egyptians retained in their hieroglyphical inscriptions," ' Finally, on this subject, Dr, S, illustrates by a few examples the absurdity of interpreting Egyp- ' Summary, etc., pp. 29, 80. » lb. pp. 88, 84. ' Summary, etc., pp. 84-40. 24: OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. tian hieroglyphics symbolically. "From the in- scription on the Eosetta stone and other bi-lingual inscriptions, we have ascertained," he says, "what ideas or conceptions are expressed by certain hie-, roglyphics. The hatchet j^, for example, de- noted God, according to all bi-lingual inscriptions. But how can a hatchet, which might at the ut- most, perhaps, have symbolically expressed the act of hewing or splitting, in any intelligible manner denote God ? The simple-minded Egyp- tians probably conceived their god Osiris to be a wood-cutter or butcher ! "We learn from the Rosetta stone that the Egyptians designated a burnt-offering by a well- bucket, JL . In all likelihood, therefore, the water of the Nile possessed at that time the properties of fire, and served for burning. "The Egyptians expressed the number 10,000 by means of the drawing of a finger, 1/ ; doubt- less because, at that time, man possessed upon his hands and feet 10,000 fingers, which have gradually dropped off." ' Bfe then afBrms that " there is not any hiero- glyphic which denotes symbolically any idea, or conception, or word ; there is not an inscription in existence that has a single symbolical sign. Even the figures or pictures employed by the Egyptians to represent their gods, are not to be explained symbolically, but grammatically, thus : The picture of the hatchet P*, in Coptic hater, represented the word God, htor, not sym- bolically, but because the two words contained the same consonants, htr." Therefore, also, the well-bucket iL , Mil, rep- resented the word burnt-offering, kalil, not sym- bolically, but because both words were formed by the same consonants. Ml ;" and "Therefore the finger if , tba, did not in a fanciful manner denote the number 10,000 tba, but because the same consonants, tb, were the basis of both words." " When, finally, we examine the written char- acters of other ancient nations formerly connected with Egypt, we find that their method of writing was syllabic. The written signs of the Chinese, numbering from 40 to 80,000, were, as Dr. S. • Summary, etc., p. 88. learned from GUtzlaff, who understood Chinese affairs better than any other European, not sym- bolic, but abbreviated syllabic hieroglyphics. Thus, for example, they still designate the town Cassel by means of two figures, of which the first was called cos, the second sel. In like manner, the groups of cuneiform characters employed by the Medes, Persians, Assyrians, and Babylonians, denoted syllables, and have all been demonstrated to have had " the Hebrew, or rather the Noa- chian alphabet, for their basis." ' Leaving the reader, therefore, to educe his own inferences regarding the alleged claims in behalf of the Samaritan over the Hebrew char- acter, and of the derivation of the latter from Egyptian hieroglyphics, we are now prepared, in this connection, to advance one more step to- wards a solution of the matter in hand, in the chapter which follows. CHAPTER III. HISTORIC SKETCH OF THE ORIGIN OF THE HEBREW, SAMARITAN, AND SEPTDAGINT VERSIONS. SECTION I. I. — The Hebrew Version. Claiming, as we do, in view of the facts ex- hibited in the preceding section, the merit of a demonstration in behalf of the divinely revealed origin of the square Hebrew character with the antediluvian patriarchs, there seems a need-be that we offer somewhat on the subject of evi- dence, in proof of the uninterrupted and uncor- rupt transmission of the Sacred Records in that character, from the beginning. This will enable us to decide whether, as Dr. Scyffarth affirms, " the Old Testament had its beginning in the land of Egypt" The reader, therefore, will not be surprised if, in the outset, we take the position that the He- brew Scriptures are the fountain-head of revela- tion ; like the waters of the rock Horeb, which came forth abundantly and followed the wander- ings of Israel,' retaining their freshness to the end. My argument is this : Either the facts recorded ' Summary, etc., pp. 88, 89, and 197, 198. See, also, Soyffarth'B Alphabeta Genuina, 1840, and Bawliuson, eto » Compare Exod. xvii. 6 with 1 Cor. x. 4. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 25 in the Hebrew Scriptures by Moses and others must have been imparted to them by divine rev- eliition, or they must have received them from others. And if we adopt the latter hypothesis, and inquire from whom did they receive their information, a few generations conduct us back to the first man, Adam. But even here we must encounter the same difficulties as at the first. For, I ask, whence had he this knowledge ? Could he, by his own unassisted reason, account for the manner of his own creation, with that of the creation of the material earth and heavens, both of which existed before he had any being \ If so, how happens it that the Greek and Eoman philosophers were not able also, by their own un- assisted reason, to adopt a rationally harmonious theory in regard to the origin of all things? A due consideration of these things, therefore, forces upon us the belief, that God, at the first, must have revealed these facts to man ; and that what He had thus made known to them, by the divinely revealed art of letters and of writing,' through the few generations that intervened be- tween Adam and Moses, they might easily pre- serve and transmit, till they were embodied in their present form in the Pentateuch. For, fol- lowing either the Hebrew or Samaritan versions as our chronological guide, it required but seven consecutive historic links to span the interval named above. Though our Scriptures are silent as to the mode, yet they explicitly state the /aci, of the Creator's visible manifestation to our first progenitor, Adam, in Eden,' and of his permitted converse with Him. Having invested hira with dominion over the eai'th, the first lesson of in- struction consisted of His imparting to him, as stated above, a knowledge of the manner of the world's origin, and of his own creation, etc. The second link was Lamech, the father of Noah, who was born sixty-one years (Heb. Chron.') before the death of Adam. He therefore could receive from him who had talked with the Creator himself, all the above facts revealed to him, together with those which originated the catastrophe of the fall, the murder of Abel, the oflFering of sacrifices, etc. Noah, the third link, learnt the same things from his father Lamech, during a period of 595 years. Shbm forms the fourtliWiik, and, as a son of Noah (and of whom, after the flood, it was said, "Blessed be the Lord God of Shem"),* could not but have been familiar > Soe, on the subject, pp. 16-18. = Geii. iii. 7-18. » The figures which foUonr are all computed on the basis of the Heb. Chron. « Gen. ix. 26. 4 with the history of the antediluvian world pre- served in the ark. He lived 502 years after the flood ; and hence became a channel of commu- nication, confirmatory of the Noachian history, to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the last of whom was 53 years old at the time of his death. The patriarchs, whom w£ shall insert as the fifth link, besides deriving from Sheni an account of all the particulars relatively to the universal deluge, must also have received infor- mation in reference to the repeopling of the earth by the descendants of Noah, the confusion of tongues at Babel, and the dispersion of man- kind over the world, etc. Then we come to the sixth link, namely, Joseph, who became ruler over all Egypt under the Pharaohs. He was born 54 years before the death of his father, Jacob, and derived from him a knowledge of all the particulars which he had received from Shem, together with the incidents of his own remark- ably eventful history, and those of his immediate ancestors, Abraham and Isaac. And, finally, the seventh and last link in this golden chain to the time of Moses, a period of about 279 years after the death of Joseph, are the Elders of Israel IN Egypt, who, probably, as well from Ephraim and Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph, as from that patriarch himself, received accounts of the same stupendous events above narrated, together with those in relation to the circumstances of their bondage in that " strange land ;" all of which, even on the supposition of a purely oral transmission of them, is a sufiicient guarantee as to their historic integrity ; but, when taken in connection with the evidence furnished on pages 16-18, that the facts above referred to were matters of written record, they meet the de- mands of the most enlarged incredulity, as to their safe transmission to the great Jewish legis- lator and prophet, Moses, by whom, under the guidance of the Divine afilatus, they were em- bodied in that Hebraic form now found in the Pentateuch. It will be well, in connection with the pre- ceding, to bear in mind the following : First. — Adam was conversant with his direct descendants to the eighth generation inclusive, viz., Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, and Lamech. Second. — All the above-named persons, except Seth, and Enoch (vvho was translated to heaven without seeing death), were contemporary with Noah. Third. — Abraham was contemporary with Shem, he being 146 years old at the time of that 26 OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITIOALLY EXAMINED. patriarch's death. Besides, Isaac was 'Jo years, and Jacob was 15 years old, at the time when Abraham died ; so that Abraham could repeat to them both, what he received from Shem, not only, but aJso all that had transpired between God and himself, in con- stiliuting him the head of the Hebrew common- wealth. To the above I have prepared the following diagram, to show the contemporaneous relation of those patriarchs named above, earh with the other, from Adam to Moses : NAMES. TIME Off BIETH. AOE AT DEATH. diageam: A.M. *. M. 1. ADAM. 130 105 930 912 - Seth 1 Eno3 90 905 g . - 70 65 162 65 910 895 962 865 1 o l p a o a 1 - Mahalaleel Enoch (Translated). Methuselah 2. LAMEOH. 3. NOAH 187 182 500 969 777 950 i — b. Lnm. 859. ■ ■d. of Adam, 930. b. Noah. 1041, - d. Lamech, 1886. i. SHEM b. Shem, 1553. I Abram b. A. u. 2008, 140 years before d. of Shem. 5. JACOB —2000 Id. Noah, 2006. b. Jacob, 2168. j 6. JOSEPH b. Jos., 2259. Mi. Shorn, 2148. 7. ELDEES in Egypt tUl the time of Kid. Jacob, 2315. — ^d. Joseph, 2869. MOSES, A. M. 2469 1 When, therefore, we take into the account that special and effectual superintendency of a direct divine providence over the mind§ of those to whom were committed the ante-Mosaic facts and events of sacred history, we cannot but feel an undoubted confidence in the preservation of these precious documents, and of their freedom from ev- ery degree of error not only, but are fully warrant- ed in drawing a similar inference respecting those additions subsequently made by other hands, dur- ing the interval between Moses and the comple- tion of the canonical Scriptures. These additions embrace the Book of Job, the Psalms of David, the writings of Ezra and Nehemiah, the Proverbs, etc., of Solomon, and the sixteen books of the major and minor prophets, and which extend over a period of about 1250 years. In this view, every sentence must be considered as initplred, in that sense in which it is proposed as truth. Facts occurred, and the words were spoken, as to the import of them and the instruction contained in them, exactly as they are recorded, though they were written in such language as the different talents, education, habits, and associations of the writers suggested or rendered natural to them. Thus each and all, from the beginning, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, acted as God's amanuenses in communicating his mind and will to man. /' On the subject of the transmission and preser- vation of the Hebrew Scriptures, entire and un- corrupt, from the time of Moses to the New Tes- tament age, — a subject to which we shall call the attention of the reader in the sequel, — I would remark : First. — That those who have given the least OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 27 attention to this subject, knowing, as tlicy do, the innumerable losses and corruptions which have befallen other writings, cannot but be struck with the remarkable contrast which the Hebrew writings present. Where is the history of Heca- tseus of Miletus? where the annals of the Chal- dean Berosus? of the Egyptian Manetho and Eratosthenes? A few mutilated fragments are all that we possess of their compendious volumes. And of the still earlier records, whence they com- piled their information, all are eternally lost, save the scanty gleanings gathered from them in the above compilations as preserved by Josephus ! Not to recapitulate the annihilation of numerous ancient archives in Asia Minor, Greece, and Syria, it will suflBce to record that the utmost zeal of Julius Caesar could not preserve from the infuri- ated Alexandrian populace the total destruction of the Ptolemaic library ; while the second might- iest collection of ancient chronicles in the Chris- tian bibliothecal repository in the same city, which it had taken six hundred years to collect, shared the same fate at the hand of the ruthless Omar. In China, ludia, and Central Asia, the Tartar conquerors amused themselves by making bonfires of the ancient libraries. In forty years, Mohammed Ali has destroyed, in Egypt, more his- torical monuments of ancient times than the Hykshos, than Cambyses, than Artaxerxes Ochus, than Lathyrus ; yea, more than had been com- passed by eighteen centuries of Roman, Byzan- tine, Arab, or Ottoman misrule. So also perished the Tyrian annals at the hand of Alexander, upon the overthrow of the fleets and fortresses of Phoenicia ; the destruction of the Punic Chron- icles at Carthage by Marius ; and of all the pub- lic registers of the seven-hilled city of Eome, by Brennus the Gaul. These examples may su£5ce to place in con- trast that more than providential care which the divine Author of Holy Scripture has exercised in their preservation. To the ordinary, may be added His special divine supervision to that end. It may be safely affirmed that the preservation to this day of the Hebrew language, like that of the Jewish people, is a standing miracle, witness- ing to the truth of God. The four Gentile mon- archies have successively swept over the land of Judea, appearing to carry destruction in their course. Assyria, Persia, Greece, and Rome — where are they ? Their memorial for the most part remains only in the pages of history. But the Jews, on whom their rage was directed, whom they scattered to the four winds of hea- ven, not only still subsist, but retain their iden- tity unbroken — nationality, language, ordinances unaltered — waiting only the restoration to their own land to become in all respects the same people as when Zion stood in palmy state. Two thousand years of oppression, under their last and most cruel persecutors, have not broken them down as a people, nor amalgamated their lan- guage with other tongues. Now, under God, this unbending character of the Jews has been directed to the preservation of the Hebrew Scrip- tures, by men raised up and qualified by God for that purpose — the earlier Prophets, before the Babylonish captivity ; Ezekiel and Daniel dur- ing its continuance ; Ezra, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, afterwards. And, before the light of prophecy was wholly extinguished in the Church, and before the Jews could be even sus- pected of perverting the text of Scripture, the providence of God appointed means by which we are now able to assure ourselves that the Hebrew text is not corrupted : first, in the Greek translation of the LXX, confirmed as it is by its agreement (except in the article of its Chronol- ogy, which will receive due notice at our hand in its proper place) with those passages quoted from the Old Testament by our Lord and his Apos- tles, which quotations, according to Mr. Home, may be arranged as follows : Quotations agreeing verbatim with the Septuagint, or only changing the person, number, etc., are in num- ber ; 75 Quotations talcen from the Septuagint, but with some variation 47 Quotations agreeing with the Septuagint in sense, but not in words ; 32 Quotations differing from the Septuagint, but agreeing exactly or nearly with tlie Hebrew 11 Quotations which differ both from the Septuagint and the Hebrew 19 Second. — ^The next evidence confirmatory of the providential preservation of the Hebrew Scriptures, is the fact that, till the coming of our Lord, we are certain they had suffered no loss. This may be gathered from the following express declarations of Christ regarding them : " The Pharisees sit in Moses' seat ; all, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do." ' " One jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." ^ I re- mark, third, that the Hebrew Scriptures, thus continuing pure till the New Testament Scrip- tures were completed, and by them authenti- cated as above, were confided to the care of the Jews — opponents of the Gospel. These, how- ever, were constantly held in check by the jeal- I Matt, xxlii. 2. 2 Matt. V. 18. 28 OUR BIBLE GHROKOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. ous and rival fidelity of the Christiau Church, to whom at the same time were confided the care of the Greek Scriptures. After the time of the Apostles, for nearly a thousand years, the He- brew language was almost unknown to the Church.. Only two of the Fathers, Origen and Jerome, made use of it in interpreting Scripture; and they had not taken up the study till late in life, and are by no means to be considered as masters of the lang-uage. The knowledge of the Hebrew, therefore, was retained only by the Jews, and even among them mainly by their Talmudical and' Cabalistic propensities. These mysterious and often puerile discussions, how- ever, were overruled, in the providence of God, to the safe-keeping of his revelation ; — an end which was more completely attained by the tal- ismanic power they attached to particular po- sitions and combinations of letters — checked as it was by the laborious enumerations of the Maso- RETBs,' and the calculations founded thereon — than it could have been by any more rational devices in those ignorant ages. Moreover, these men were so intent on the supposed mystery which every letter of the Bible involved, that the idea of corrupting the text they would start from as a sacrilege which might provoke instant judgment ; and even if they had attempted such a Clime, the cross ligatures of these intricate combinations, which fixed every letter to its own place, rendered the crime impracticable. It is clear, from Philo-Judaeus and parts of Josephus (to say nothing of Sohor, Bahir, or Jetzirah), that the Cabalistic dogmas are of very early date ; the Talmudists and Paraphrasts began as early ; and if any one should suspect the Jews of desir- ing to corrupt the text of the Hebrew Scriptuises, let him consider this argument, derived from their own Talmuds and Cabala, and he will im- 1 " Next to the perfection of the Hebrew character itself, we are disposed to place the Masoretio punctuation as pre- senting an effectual barrier against the corruption of the Hebrew text. We believe tl^e points and accents to be as old as the time of Ezra, if not an integral part of the lan- guage from the beginning. But we are content to waive this discussion, and only to assume, what no sane man can deny, and what Capellus and Brian Walton fully conceded, namely, that the points do everywhere define and fix the true sense of Scripture, and that without them we phould probably have lost the knowledge of Hebrew in the mis- eries and ignorance of the dark ages. The Hebrew points and accents mutually depend on each other, and cannot be separated. Tho connection of the sentence and the regimen of the words fix the accents, and the position of these determines the vowel points of each word ; for the same word is pointed differently when governed by dif- ferent accents. TJim the sense of tlie whole passage operates as a check upon each letter in the sentence, mid becomes a great safeguard against corruption or loss." mediately perceive the utter hopelessness of such an attempt. John Pious, of Mirandola, prompted by the in- comprehensible mysteries shadowed forth in the Cabalistic writing-s — and which, stripped of their puerilities, in analogy to the philosophy of Plato, show profundity and sublimity beyond any other speculations — about the year a. d. 1490 became the principal agent of the revival of Hebrew learning in Christendom. From him Peter Gal- atine and Reuchlin, a. d. 1513, caught their ar- dor ; but they also gave their chief study to Cabalistic lore. Eeuchlin, however, published his Hebrew Grammar and Lexicon ; and, the way being then opened, Pagninus, a, d. 1527, Munster, a.d. 1539, Brixianus, the Buxtorfs, Cas- till, A. D. 1551, and a thousand more, succeeded; who left no region of Oriental lore unexplored, and largely contributed to the brilliancy of that blaze of light which the Church enjoyed in that Augustinian age of theology, during which she accumulated a treasure of learning which her sons of the succeeding ages have been too in- dolently contented to draw upon, without sufii- ciently exerting themselves to add to the common stock. But a more generous and independent spirit seems now to animate them, and may God bless and increase it ! We are now favored with numerous editions of the Hebrew Scriptures, the best of which are : 1. Athias and Leusden, 1667; from which the Jews generally now write their rolls for the syna- gogue. 2. Jablonski, 1699; the most beautiful, and, as is thought by some, the most accurate of all the editions. 3. Vanderhooght, 1705; which is most generally esteemed, and is a very fine edition. 4. David Nunes Torres, 1700, 4 vols. 12mo. ; an edition much esteemed by the Jews. But, to the theological student, that of Michaelis, 1720, is by far the most useful : its text is among the most correct, and its marginal references and notes are incomparably valuable. SECTION II.- n. — The Samaritan Version. Of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which is limited to the first book of Moses, there are two copies — the common Hebrew, and the Samaritan version. It originated on this wise : The Samaritans were constituted of the occupants of that port«n of OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 29 Palestine called the Ten Tribes, who dwelt in Samaria, together with the remnant of the Is- raelites which the King of Assyria collected from Babylon, Cuth, Ava, etc. They had asked to be permitted to a'^sist the Jews of the two tribes in the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, after their return from the Babylonish captivity ; but, being refused, they became their inveterate enemies, and built a temple of their own upon Mount Gerizim. They claim their descent from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, and also that their dialect is the true and original Hebrew. Their Pentateuch is written in a character simi- lar to that of the square Hebrew letter ; and though the Jews do not acknowledge them, and contemptuously call them " alien colonists," yet, with the exception that it varies in the chro- nology of the antediluvian and postdiluvian patri- archs, it corresponds in other respects almost word for word with the original Hebrew text. We know from Clemens that the Samaritans also had a Book of Joshua, which, like their Pentateuch, contained interpolated particulars which are not found either in the Hebrew or Greek texts, including the time of Joshua, twenty- five years (the death of Joshua being there placed sixty-five years after the Exodus), also adopted by Africanus. We know also, from John iv. 25, that the Sa- maritans had the same expectation of the Mes- siah with the Jews, and therefore recognized and possessed the prophetic writings ; but if they had the Pentateuch, the Book of Joshua, and the Prophets, there can be no doubt but they also possessed the Books of Judges, of Kings, and the other intervening Books of the sacred canon. (See Prideaux, Part I., p. 605, 8vo.) SECTION III. in. — The Cheek Sepiuagint Version. The name of this version is derived from the circumstance that it was the combined work of the LXX, or Seventy-two interpreters, all of WHOM WERE Jews. It was made in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about B. C. 265, and in the manner following, if we can rely upon the account of it by Aristseus, who, as it is said, was himself one of the Lifeguards of the Egyptian monarch for whom the translation was made. Deraetreus Phalereus, librarian to the king. having used great industry to collect books for the library of his majesty at Alexandria, Ptolemy asked him, one day, how many volumes he had collected ; to which he answered, 200,000, but that he hoped shortly to increase it to 500,000 : stating, that he had been informed that the laws of the Jews were worthy a place there ; observ- ing, however, that they should first be translated into Greek. The king said he would write to the High Priest of the Jews concerning it ; when Aristaeus observed, that since it was his desire to obtain these works, it would become his liberality and magnificence to set free a number of Jews who were at this time in servitude in Egypt ; that so, the whole Jewish nation, becoming obli- gated by his favor, might be the more ready and willing to supply the books in question. Ptole- my, inquiring the number of those captives, was informed that they were computed at about 100,000 ; but at this he was not discouraged, and at once proceeded to redeem the entire number, by paying out of his own treasury to their re- spective owners so much per head, at a total expense of about 600 talents." After this, the king wrote to Eleazar the High Priest, desiring the books, and translators compe- tent to render them into the Greek tongue. This letter Avas carried by ambassadors, among whom was Aristffius, and his friend Andreas, bearing also rich presents. Eleazar complied, and sent the sacred rolls, with seventy-two interpreters skilled in the Greek and Hebrew tongues, to con- duct the translation. He also wrote an answer to the king, thanking him for his rich presents, and commending his piety towards God, and his generosity to the Jews in his dominion. Ptolemy received the commission with gratitude ; showed every possible respect to the Holy Books, and greatly admired the beauty of the writing ; and assured thetieputies that he should ever look on the day of their arrival as a public festival ; and, thai day happening to be the same on which he overcame Antigonus in a sea-fight, he honored them by an invitation to eat with him. The interpreters, in order to avoid interrup- tion, retired to a quiet part of the Isle of Pharos; and on completing the translation, it was put into the hands of DemetreuS, and read in an assembly of the Jews at Alexandria, to the entire satisfac- tion of monarch and people. Soon after, besides numerous marks of kingly favor bestowed upon the interpreters, they were sent back to Judea ' This sum, estimating it according to tlie Egyptian, Attic, or Eubffian talent of silver, at 228i pounds, was equal to £186,875 sterling. 30 OUK BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. with great reward, and valuable presents for Eleazar, the High Priest. This version, therefore, being the principal, though, as we shall show, not the first, is the most venerable translation of the Scriptures from the original Hebrew ; and, as history informs us, it was, in common with the Hebrew Scriptures, in the hands of the Jews in Palestine (all of whom were acquainted with the Greek lan- guage), was used in their synagogues,' and was also read and quoted from by Christ and his Apostles. And, as already stated, the Hebrew Scriptures, in the age immediately succeeding that of the Apostles, being committed to the custody of the Jews," shut up the early Church to the necessity of an exclusive use of the Sep- tuagint, down to the time of Origen. But, through the process of transcription, this version had grown corrupt. Again referring the reader to the great care observed by the Jews in preparing their materials for, and their scrupu- lous exactness in copying their Scriptures (as described on pages 18, 19, of this work), I would remark, that there seems not to have been the same care and vigilance in regard to the tran- scription of the Greek Scriptures. For, in the Christian Church there existed no prohibition against the multiplication of copies, nor was there any prescribed rule or imperative necessity for examining the finished manuscript. Clear- ness of writing was more regarded than compe- tency of knowledge ; and some of the earliest manuscripts remaining — the Alexandrine, for in- stance — were written by women indiflferently ac- quainted with the language, and owe their preser- vation to the little use that was made of them. But the copies of the New Testament were so very numerous, the comments of the Fathers so copious and minute, the versions began so early, and" the great doctrines were so interlaced into whole chapters and epistles, by the many contro- versies with heretics and the Councils assembled on their account, that we are able, by these nu- merous checks on errors, and these various ave- nues to truth, as certainly to fix the true mean- ing of the New Testament Scriptures as that of the Old. The Greek Septuagint, as already stated, had, down to the time of Origen, become exceedingly corrupt, as its notes prove. That Father, how- ever, received this version as that of the LXX, with the exception of the Book of Daniel, which > Home's Introd., 2tl edition, vol. ii. p. 179. * See page 27, was Theodotian's, and set to work to correct it from the best manuscripts, and inserted it in one of the columns of his Tetrapla, and also into his Hexapla ; which consisted of, 1. The Hebrew text ; 2. The Hebrew words written in Greek characters; 3. The version of the LXX ; 4. The version of Aqnila; 5. The version of Theodo- tian ; and, 6. The version of Symmachus — ar- ranged in six parallel columns. Of all these, ex- cepting the LXX, fragments only remain ; which were collected, first by Drusius, afterwards more diligently by Montfaucon. _ Jerome speaks of two classes of the LXX: 'one, the common sort, and very incorrect ; the other, from Origen's Hexapla, which he followed. Correct editions of the Greek Testament abound everywhere, and are too numerous to mention, further than to allude to those of the Stephens', Mills', Bengel, Wet- stein, Greisbach, etc. CHAPTEE IV. THE HEBREW VERSION VerSUS THE GREEK SEPTUA- GINT ; OR, PROOF, BT HISTORICAL FACTS, AND BY ASTRONOMICAL CALCULATIONS OF THE AN- CIENT EGYPTIANS, CHALDEANS, ETC., ETC., AS CONTRASTED WITH SAID FACTS, OF THE AUTHEN- TICITY OF THE COMPUTATION OF TIME CON- TAINED IN THE AUTHORIZED HEBREW BIBLES, AS CRITICALLY EXAMINED AND CORRECTED, AND HARMONIZED WITH THE CHRONOLOGY OF PRO- FANE WRITERS. Having invited the reader, on the subject of scriptural " times and seasons," to join us in our rambles through what may be called a sort of historico-chronological forest, now grown hoary and wrinkled by age, our object in the pre- ceding pages has been, to clear away the under- brush and to thin out the superincumbent foliage that have heretofore obstructed the path, ob- scured the vision, and impeded the progress of the inquirer after truth, in these premises. But, however successful our endeavors thus far (and of that the candid and unbiased are left to form their own estimate), our work in this department yet remains unfinished. We shall therefore, in this chapter, resume the task allotted us, by in- troducing the reader to the matter contained in the sections which follow. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 31 SECTION I. An Examination and Proof of the superior Claims of the Hebrew over the Septuaffint Ver- sion, in determining the true Chronology of Scripture, as derived from Historical Facts and Astronomical Data, from the Era of the Flood to the Birth of Christ. It will impart additional interest to the subject in hand if, in the first instance, we throw our- selves back into those remote annals of time, when flourished the distinguished personages whose productions are to furnish the starting- point of our present investigations. We will begin with Moses, the author of the Pentateuch. He was the son of Amram and Jochebed, both of tHe house of Levi, one of the three principal heads of the tribes of Israel.' Subsequently, however, he became the adopted son of the daughter of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who, hav- ing repaired to the Nile to bathe, found him on the brink of the river in an ark of bulrushes, prepared by maternal affection, to preserve him from falling a prey to the cruel edict of the Egyptian monarch, who had doomed all the male children of the enslaved Hebrews to death by drowning, to prevent the subversion of his king- dom by their further increase.' Moses received his name from his adopted mother, " because," said she, " I drew him out of the water." He remained in Egypt till he was 40 years of age, and was there educated in all the wisdom of that nation.' But all the splen- dors of an Egyptian court failed to eradicate from his recollection the fact that he was of Hebrew birth, or from his heart affection towards his down-trodden and enslaved brethren. Nor is it to be doubted that he was divinely qualified to instruct his fellow-students, in return for the learning he had acquired among them, in that pure system of cosmogony and history whereby the origin of time and of the material universe, and the consequent existence of a Supreme First Cause, is demonstrated ; and which he, subse- quently to his flight from the Egyptian court to the plains of Mamre, committed to writing. It is generally conceded by theologians, that the Book of Genesis was written by Moses in the land of Midian, under inspiration, from anterior records of the creation, etc., as revealed to the patriarchs from the beginning,^ between the 40th 1 Exod. ii. 14-20. " Acts vii. 22. » lb. i. 8-22 ; ii. 1-10. * See pp. 24-26 of thia work. and 80th year of his age, or in some year be- tween his flight from Egypt and the Exode. Passing for the present from Moses, we shall now introduce to the notice of the reader another per- sonage — Hermes Trismegistus, the second, whom Mane- tho tells us was the son of Agathodsemon, and father of Taut, and the copyist of the Egyptian Genesis and other Hermaic writings, which he, the said Hermes, transcribed from the sculptured tablets of Thoth, the first Hermes and second King of Egypt, and laid up in the temple, where Manetho found them, and translated into Greek, in the work named Sethos, in three Books, which he dedicated to King Ptolemy, about B. C. 260.' From the same Genesis of Hermes Trismegis- tus, Sanchoniathon also, the Phcenician annalist, and the most ancient profane writer extant, transla- ted his Cosmogony and genealogies, reaching from the creation to the foundation of kingdoms after the flood, etc. But the point of principal interest in these premises is, that the contents of the Hermaic Genesis, as preserved in the first Book of Mane- tho, and by Sanchoniathon, descending as tliey do to the age of the Mosaic annals, and no lower, furnish the evidence that this Hermes Trismegis- tus was a contemporary with Moses, or, at least, that he flourished about the same age. This was the general opinion of the ancients. Suidas cites an ancient author, as referring to the history of Joseph, with whose death the Mosaic Genesis concludes, to the Egyptian Hermes. And Arta- panus (Euseb., prsep. Evang., L. ix., C. xxvii.) roundly affirms that Hermes was no other than Moses himself, who instructed the Egyptians in philosophy, and, by reason of his interpretations 1 Manetho was a learned Egyptian — a native of the Sebennitio Nome in the .Eastern Delta, Lower Egypt — high priest, and sacred scribe of Heliopolis, who flour- ished about the year 260 B. C, and wlio, at the command of Ptolemy Philadelphua, composed a history of the tings of Egypt, in tlie Greek language, from the earliest times down to Alexander's invasion, B. 0. 332. This work he dedicated to Philadelphns, with the following letter : "The Epistle of Manetho, the Sebennyte, to Ptolemseus Philadelphus : " To the great and august King Ptolemseus, Manetho, the high priest and scribe of the sacred Adyta in Egypt, being by birth a Sebennyte, and a citizen of Heliopolis, to his sovereign Ptolemseus, humbly greeting : " It is right for us, most mighty king, to pay attention to all things which it is your pleasure we should take into consideration. In answer, therefore, to your inquiries concerning the things which shall come to pass in the world, I sliall, according to your commands, lay before you what I have gathered from the sacred books written by Hermes Trismegistus, our forefather. Farewell, my prince and sovereign." 32 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. of the sacred writings, was named by the priests Hermes, or the Interpreter. But Eusebius has critically decided this point. Quoting from Her- mes' first copyist, Sanchoniatbon, he says, in Chron. Hieron, sub anno 556, or b. c. 1460, be- ing the eleventh year after the death of Moses, " His temporibias, Tat fiiiis Hermetis Trismegisti fuisse dignoscitur." It seems evident, therefore, that this personage was one of Pharaoh's magi- cians, and in all probability a fellow-student with Moses in the colleges of Heliopolis or Tanis. It would appear from Manetho, that he was a priest of Heliopolis ; for that historian was himself one, and in his Epistle to Ptolemy, he reckons Hermes Trismogistus among his predecessors.' The Hermaic record as above, therefore, comes out somewhere about the 60th year of Moses. This assigns to the Egyptian Genesis and Astro- chronological system of Hermes Trismegistus the highest antiquity ; for Sanchoniatbon tells us that they were written by command of Taut, king of Egypt, the first Hermes of Manetho, which had been altered by the Hierophants, down to the time of Isiris, the inventor of the alphabet, and his brother Gna, the first Phoenix, or Phoenician, etc. ; which account is clearly the Phoenician version of that related by ]Vt,anetho from the same source. And thus, whichever authority we consult, we find that the Hermaic Genesis, com- mencing, like the Mosaic, from the origin of his- tory, was continued nearly through the same number of ages, and terminated nearly about the same time; the inspired Genesis ending with the death of Joseph, while the Hermaic seems to have been continued till about the age of the sacred annalist. In view, therefore, of the above fiicts, to wit, the evidence of the priority of the origin of the inspired Pentateuch as written by Moses on the plains of Mamre, we are furnished with a refuta- tion of those who aflBrm, as does Dr. Scyffarth, that " the Old Testament had its beginning in Egypt," or who suppose the Mosaic writings to be a compilation from Egyptian traditions. So far from it, precisely the reverse is true. The magicians of Egypt, whose love of pre-emi- nence was a national characteristic, would very naturally avail themselves of every advantage to improve their own knowledge, and concoct a system which would possess more the appearance of truth, according to the principles of human science as they understood it, from the traditional facts which they gleaned from the prior teach- ings and writings of Moses. ' See note, p. 81 of this work. Nor would the corruption of the inspired tra- ditionary facts, thus obtained, be confined to the historical parts only. It seems reasonable to expect that the Egyptian magicians would also extend the same principle of corruption to the CHRONOLOGY of the great Jewish annalist. And if such can be found, the wonderful care of the ancients in all that related to time and motion, may lead us to conclude that its bearings upon the subject in hand may be fer more important than their purely historic fragments. That it is so, I shall now proceed to demonstrate, I. — Or Sacred Chronology. Our first business, however, is with Sacred Chronology. On this subject, in order to reach satisfactory results, it is indispensable that we determine upon a criterion of measurement of time. The point to be determined is the differ- ence, if any, between the length of the antedilu- vian and postdiluvian years ; and whether time, as measured by sacred chronology, harmonizes with our solar year : and if so, on what princi- ple. The conclusion to which these inquiries will conduct us, if I mistake not, will evidence that the sacred writers were not, as some suppose, astronomical novices. First, then, as it respects antediluvian time. In Gen. i. 14, we read, "And God said. Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven, to divide the day from the night : and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years." In accordance with this arrangement of the heavenly bodies, before the flood, the sun made one entire revolution in 360 days, which were divided into 12 months of 30 days each, and the civil and solar years were the same. Of this we have ample evidence, in the Mosaic ac- count of the flood. In his chronological compu- tation of it, Moses informs us that it began " on the seventeenth day of the second month ; that it prevailed, without any sensible abatement, for one hundred and fifty days; and that the ark lodged on Mount Ararat on the seventeenth day of the tenth month.'" So that we see, from the 17th of the 2d month, to the iHh of the Yth month (i. e., for five whole months), he al- lows 150 days, which is just 80 days to each month, for five times thirty days are a hundred and fifty. During the antediluvian age, therefore, it was easy and natural for astronomers to divide the circle of the sun's annual course into 360 parts. ' Gen. vii. 11, 24 ; and viii. 8, i. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 33 But, immediately following tlie flood, and as an effect of it, the heavens underwent such a change as to add to the annual revolution of the sun 6 days and almost 6 hours ; so that the length of the postdiluvian solar year became thencefor- ward 365 days and 6 hours. But, in view of Moses' chronological arithme- tic, as above, and also from the fact that no mi- raculous intimation had been given of the differ- ence between a solar antediluvian and postdiluvian year, it is argued by many that the sacred annal- ist did not recognize the change ; or, if he did, that he was not astronomer enough to correct it. I shall maintain that both these inferences are gratuitous. In the first place, it is evident that Moses' chronological account of the flood stands connected with the close of that era, and was therefore simply recorded in antediluvian current time. The change in the annual revolution of the sun followed that catastrophe in the line of cause and efiect. In reference to the other point, I observe, second, that if it can be shown that the Hebrews reckoned time astronomically, and that that mode commenced in the time of Moses, it will follow that the Jewish year, from the period of his mission down to the time of Solomon, could not have been reckoned exclu- sively by a year of 12 months, each of 30 days. Take the following in illustration. In 1 Chron. xii. 32, we read, "And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do," etc.; or, as the Targum has it, " They (i. e., the children of Issachar) were skilful in the knowledge of times, and wise to fix the beginning of years ; dexterous at setting the new moans, and fixing their feasts at their seasons." Now, it is here to be noted, that, in the number- ing of Israel, the tribe of Issachar stands next to that of Judah} Upon their entrance into Ca- naan, Issachar was one of the six tribes ap- pointed to stand on Mount Ephraim to bless the people ;' and the princes of Issachar were with Deborah in her war against Jabin and Sisera.' And though, in the above passage of 1 Chron. xii. 32, we are brought down to the time oi David, yet the learned Prideaux refers to this conspicuous tribe, when, speaking of the meas- urement of Jewish time " while they lived in their own land," he adds, they " might easily receive notice of what was ordained in this mat- ter, hy those who had the care and ordering of > Numb. i. 29 ; ii. 5. ' Judg, iv. ; and v. 1, 5. 4 Dent, xxvii. 12. ii." ' But this carries us back at least to the time of Joshua, the immediate successor of Moses, while it was under the latter that the numbering of the tribes was made ; and, as the knowledge of times in fixing the beginning of the Jewish year, and regulating their feasts, etc., was indis- pensable from the first, it is not to be doubted but that " the children of Issachar, who had under- standing of the times" (an expression denoting that they had long possessed, it), derived all their information respecting it from the great Jewish annalist himself. Nor is this all. We are fur- nished in Scripture with a nucleus as to the mode by which they conducted their astronomical cal- culations. For example : we know that the lengthening of the days of King Hezekiah for 16 years, was confirmed by the miraculous throw- ingback of the shadow on the sun-dial of Ahaz ten degrees? And, though it does not appear by whom and when this sun-dial was first brought into use, yet, quere, with whom so probable as with the astronomical "children of Issachar?" In order, however, that we may obtain a full view of the nature of Jewish time, and to show its harmony with the Julian solar year, we shall lay down the following rule, to wit : " That though the Jewish ordinary yBar IS to bk attended to when but tew years ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION ; YET, IN A LONG SUCCESSION OP TIME, THEY ARE NOT TO BE NO- TICED ; FOR, BY INTERCALATIONS, THEY AMOUNT TO THE SAME WITH SOLAR TIME."' I. Of the postdiluvian sabred year from the flood to the mission of Moses, the Hebrews no doubt computed time by the antediluvian solar year of three hundred and sixty days. During their bondage in Egypt, they were probably regu- lated in their mode of reckoning by the Egyptian calendar. " But that the Israelites made use of (either) after their coming out of Egypt, can never be made consistent with the Mosaical Law."^ For, II. At the time of the Exode, " the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, This month shall be unto you the BEGINNING of Ifiionths : it shall be the first MONTH of the YEAR to you" ' And again : ^'■And thou shall number seven Sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years ; and the space of the seven Sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. Then shall thou > Prid. Conneo., vol. i. p. 93. = 2 Kings xx. 8-11. s J. Bieheno, A. M., Signs of the Times. Fleming, Appendix, p. 143. * Prid. Con., vol. i. p. 100. ' Exod. xii. 1, 2. Si OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. cause the trumpet of the Jubilee to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month ; in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound in all your land; and ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land, unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall he a JuDiLKE unto you ; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. A jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto you ; ye shall not sow, nei- ther reap that which groweth of itself in it ; nei- ther gather the grapes in it of the vine undressed."' These two passages constitute the basis of sacred time, according to the Jewish reckoning. From the first is formed their Ecclesiastical year, which takes its rise from the observance of the Passover, instituted in the month of Nisan, near the time of the vernal Equinox. From the second, the Civil year, or the period of the Jubilee, which restored to every individual Jew his civil rights and forfeited possessions, and which was cele- brated in the month of Tisri, about the time of the autumnal Equinox. While, therefore, the former year was used to adjust the observance of their fasts, festivals, and other ecclesiastical times and concerns, the latter formed the basis of all their computations in the regulation of their Jubilees and Sabbatical years, and other civil matters, such as contracts, obligations, etc. The month Nisan, in which commenced the Jewish ecclesiastical year, is also called Ahib!' The Passover, instituted under Moses in this month, was their principal festival, appointed as a perpetual memento of their Exode from Egypt. The time of its observance was fixed by a divine command.^ This direction very naturally led to the measurement of time by months ; in doing which, they could only determine the length of the year by marking the phasis, or appearance of the moon. From one new moon to the other, therefore, they could tell the number of days in each month by the number of days of their week."'' Hence, at the appearance of the new moon, they began their months. But the course of the moon, i, e., from one new moon to another, consisted of twenty-nine days and a half, and to avoid the confusion otherwise arising from this circumstance, they made their months to consist of twenty-nine and of thirty days, alternately ; " and of twelve of these months their common year consisted." They were as follows : ' Levit. XXV. 8-11. « Deut. xvi. 1. ' Exod. xii. 2. Lev. xxiii. 5. Numb. ix. 2-5 ; xxviii. 16. * Exod. XX. 8-11. ITissD, or Abib, 29 days. lyar, or Tziv, 80 days. Bivan, 29 days. Tamuz 80 days Ab, 29 days. Elul, 80 days. Tisrl, or Etbanlm, . .29 days. Bui, or Marchesvan,.30 days. CIslen 29 days. Tebet, 80 days. Shebat, 29 days. Adar, 80 days. But their ecclesiastical year commencing with Nisan, or Abib, as above, and including these twelve months, made up a lunar year of only three hundred and fifty-four days, which, in one year, fell eleven days short of the solar year ; in consequence of which, the second lunar year commenced earlier than the solar by eleven days ; and this, " in thirty-three years' time, would carry back the beginning of the year (lunar) through all the four seasons to the same point again, and get a whole year from the solar reckoning." Hence, independently of some medium to har- monise lunar and solar time, it were impossible to adhere to the Divine command as to the time of observing the Passover. To remedy this defect, the Hebrews had re- course to the following expedient. Their Paschal Festival, " the first day of which was always fixed to the middle of their month Nisan;"' their Pentecost fifty days after;' and their Feast of Tabernacles, on the fifteenth of Tisri, six months after : ' as the first required the eating of the Paschal Lamb, and the ofi^ering up of the wave-sheaf, as the first-fruits of their barley harvest ; the second, the oflfering of the two wave-loaves, as the first-fruits of their wheat harvest ; and the third, being the time fixed for the ingathering of all the fruits of the earth, " the Passover could not be observed till the lambs were grown fit to be eaten, and the barley fit to be reaped; nor the Pentecost, till the wheal was ripe ; nor the Feast of the Tabernacles, till the ingatherings of the vine-yard and olive-yard were over.-' Hence the necessity of intercalating their lunar year, which was done in the following manner : " Whenever, according to the course of the common year, the fifteenth day of Nisan happened to fall before the day of their vernal equinox, then they intercalated a month, and then the Paschal solemnity was thereby carried one month farther into the year, and all the other festivals with it. This intercalary month, being added at the end of the year, after the last month, Adar, they called Veadar, or the second Adar, which made that year consist of thirteen months, or three hundred and eighty-four days. This intercalation took place on the second or ' Exod. xii. 8-20. Lev. xxiii. 4r-S. Numb, xxviii, 16. 17. '■" Lev. xxiii. 15-lT. Deut. xvi. 9. » Lev. xxiii. 84-39. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 3d third year, as tbe case might be, and formed the Jewish leap-yesLT, from the institution of the Passover under Moses, down to the time of the Captivities. We deem it incontrovertible, therefore, that, according to the Mosaical law, as their year dur- ing the last-named period was made up of months purely lunar, it conld in no other way be made to harmonize with solar time than by an interca- lary month. Not, however, that it is pretended that their months can be fixed to any certain day m the Julian calendar, they falling always within the compass of thirty days, — sooner or later there- in, as will appear from the following : 7. Tizri, ■; 1. Nisan, . 2. lyar,... 8. Sivan, . 4. Tamaz, 5. Ab, ... 6. £la1,... J March. ■ ■ ■ I April. ' April. May. i June. j June. [July. (July. i August. \ Augxtst. X September. 8. Marcbesvan, 9. Clslcn, 10. Tebet, 11. Shobat, 12. Adar, September. October. October. November. November. December. December. January. January. February. February. March. But, as of the Jewish ecclesiastical, so of their civil year. Their Jubilees, which were celebra- ted every fiftieth year, were periods of seven Sab- baths of years complete, with an intercalary year added on, completing half a century, when seven Sabbaths were numbered again, and so on ; the following account of which we have in the Book of Leviticus. Says the Lord to Moses, " A Jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto you — ye shall not sow. In the year of this Jubilee ye shall return, every man unto his possession."' Now it is plain from the following, viz. — " When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a Sabbath unto the Lord : six years shalt thou sow thy fields, but in the seventh shall be a Sabbath of rest unto the Lord,'"' &o. — that the direction for counting the seven Sabbatical years that precede the Jubilee is the same as that of the single Sabbatical year — one command serves for all. Nor are we left to conjecture as to whether the first Sabbatical year of the series begins with a Jubilee ; that being directly con- trary to the Divine command, which prohibits all sowing and reaping in that year.' Nor is it at all necessary to the completion of the fifty years' Jubilee, that the first in the series should be a Jubilee. This is evident from its analogy with the feast of Pentecost, for the calculating of which the following direction was given : " And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, &c. : seven Sabbaths shall be com- ' Lev. XXV. 19, and v. 18. ' lb. XXV. 11-18. lb . XXV. 8, i. plete, even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath shall ye number fifty days.'" Now, from the morrow after the first Sabbath to the morrow after the seventh Sabbath, both inclusive, are fifty days, independent of the Sabbath from which the period is really dated, but from which it is carefully separated in the direction for the mode of reckoning. Finally, on the subject of the Jewish mode of reckoning time as above set forth, we remark, that during their sojourn in their own land, or under the kings, captivities, &c., we think we have demonstrated the correctness of the rule, " that though the Jewish ordinary year is to be attended to when but few years are under consid- eration, yet in a long succession of time they are not to be noticed ; for, by intercalations, they amount to the same with solar time." Waiving, for the present, the question regard- ing the coincidence of prophetic chronology with the above, and of its harmony with the regula- tion of the Vulgar Era, I pass on to the sub- ject,— IL — Of Ancient Profane Chronology. The prevalence, in the age immediately next to the deluge, of adapting the annals of nations to astronomical cycles and eras, is well known to every scholar. This is especially true, not only of the Hebrews, but also of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Hindoos, and Greeks. In treating of this subject, a simple allusion to the Chinese annals must suffice. They place the date of their first dynasty about the middle of the twenty-fifth century b. c, and represent that the places of the equinoxes and solstices were ascertained as early as the year b. c. 246G ten years after the true Hebrew date of the deluge. Our principal concern is with the chronological annals of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Greeks. I. Of the Chaldeans. I have already alluded to the remarkable coincidences between the frag- mentary remains of ancient profane writers and the Mosaic records' as evidence of the tradition- ary origin of the historic facts of the former as derived from the latter. We have the testimony of Berosus, who is the celebrated historian and astronomer of the Chaldeans, and who wrote B. c. 268, that their history of the ten antedilu- vian generations differs but in names from the Hebrew account. He expressly afiirms that • Lev. xxiii. 15, 16, and xxv. 11-18. » See p. 82, of this work. 36 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. ZiTHURus (the same with Noah) compiled me- moirs of the previous history of mankind before the flood, from which all existing accounts were said to be derived. And, as the Chaldeans were a Semitic, and hence cognate tribe with the Hebrews, deriving through Noah a knowledge of the art of letters and of writing," so of their early construction of tables with astronomical observations. Diodorus, in treating of the Chaldeans, speaks of them as '' an Egyptian colony," and hence expressly avers that they learned astronomy from the Egyptians. The facts of history, however, abundantly demonstrate that they pi-eceded the Egyptians in their astronomical observations by several centuries. These observations, in the time of Alexander, ascend to within about a century of the flood. And, as the annals of Berosus are founded on the traditionary writings of the patriarchs, the variations between their chronology and that of the Hebrew Scriptures are to be accounted for on the simple ground of a corruption of the original sacred numbers and eras. How this was done, may be seen from the difiference between the true and the false number of degrees of equinoctial precession. That of the true is as follows. For example ; take the day of the vernal equinox in a. d. lYSo — the disc of the sun may have covered a certain star in the ecliptic ; but on the same day of the year A. D. 1857, the same star stood beside the sun in the east. Now, during this interval of 72 years (or, more accurately, of 7l|), the sun re- moved one degree, or two diameters of the moon. Whereas, the Chaldeans erroneously computed the equinoctial precession at 100 years to a de- gree. This. phenomenon is termed the precession of the equinoctial points. Sir Isaac Newton, on this subject, says (Chron., p. 94), that at about the middle year of the observations of Hippar- chus. Anno Nabonassar 602, b. o. 147, "the equi- nox must have gone back 11 degrees since the Argonautic Expedition ;" that is, he observes, " in 1090 years, according to the chronology of the ancient Greeks then in use ; and this is after the rate of about 99 years, or, in round numbers, 100 years to a degree, as was then stated by Hippar- chus. But," he adds, "t< really went back a degree in 72 years, and 11 degrees in 792 year's,^'' etc. According to this difference in reckoning, therefore, the Chaldean error would be 100 — 71j=28j years for each succeeding century. In ' See p. 19 of this work. the lapse of time, however, the astronomy of the Chaldeans fell into comparative disuse, and gave place to that of, II. The Egyptian. We have seen above' that the contents of the Hermaic Genesis, as pre- served by Sanchoniathon, and in the first Book of Manetho, the distinguished historian and as- tronomer of the Egyptians, descend to the age of the sacred annahst, Moses. Accordingly, com- puting from the sacred Hebrew root of astronom- ical calculations, the date of that work falls on a period coeval with the inspired Genesis itself. It follows, as I have said, that the Egyptian system, of time owes its origin to the sacred ; with this difference, that Hermes Trismegistus, whoever he was, derived it from direct collision with the in- spired writer himself. And, as the era of the Hermaic records constituted the golden age of science and learning among the Egyptians, their astronomers thenceforward kept records of eclipses, as appears from the 373 solar and 832 lunar eclipses mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, from Aristotle and Sotion, to have been observed in Egypt before the days of Alexander ; a number which M. Bailly computes might have been noted in the space of twelve or thirteen centuries, in a country with a clear atmosphere like Egypt and Chaldea. These records, therefore, ascend to the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries before the Christian era. From about the same time Simpli- cius dates the Egyptian observations, or 2000 years before the reign of Justinian, which began A. D. 527. We may hence infer, that in the age of Moses the Egyptians discovered the true quantity of the solar tropical year, and also that the doctrine of equinoctial precession was then understood, men- tion being made of the Zodiacal period in the Hermaic Genesis. But it may be asked, In what way did the an- cient Egyptians express and preserve their astro- nomical observations ? In answering this inquiry, we find, in the first place, among the ancients, a statement to the effect that they designated the seven planets by means of the images of their seven supreme divinities, the Kabiri ; and the twelve signs of the Zodiac by means of the images of their twelve great gods. The ancients, in con- sequence of their ignorance of the telescope, were acquainted with only seven planets, arranged in e series according to their several velocities, thus Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, the Sun, Venus, Mercury and the Moon. The Zodiac is the belt of th( ' See p. 82 of this work. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 37 heavens within which these seven planets per- form their perpetual revolutions. The middle of this belt is the Une on which the sun advances, or the ecliptic, a circle which, like all others, was divided into 360 degrees. The Zodiac is di- vided into 12 sections of 80 degrees, each section containing a group of stars, into which the ima- gination conjured up figures of men, animals, and utensils ; whence the name of the Zodiac (literally, the circle or belt of animals). The signs of the Zodiac are the following : Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scor- pio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, and Pisces ; their course, when observed with the north pole behind the spectator, is, hke that of the sun, moon, and planets, from right to left. Each of the signs of 30 degrees in length were also subdivided into 3 smaller sections of 10 degrees (Decuriae) ; into 5 sections of different lengths (Horia) ; into 12 sections of 2^ degrees (Dodecaternaria) ; and lastly, into 30 sections of 1 degree (Moriae) ; and every one of these sub- divisions of the Zodiac was presided over by one of the inferior divinities. Thus, by bringing the images of the 7 planetary gods in connection with those of the 12 Zodiacal gods, and with the subordinate deities of each sign with which a planet stood in conjunction, the Egyptians expressed their astronomical ob- servations, and especially the position of the 7 planets at the time of memorable events.' But the Egyptians, like the Chaldeans, and in- deed all ancient nations, being destitute of the aid of telescopes, fell into the same error of com- puting the phenomenon of the equinoctial pre- cession at 101 J years to a degree, instead of 71^ years. Not so with the Hebrews. For, though it is not pretended that they were miraculously provided with a set of modern astronomical ap- paratus, yet (as with the children of Issachar, who had understanding of the times)' they were en- abled to harmonize both their ecclesiastical and civil with the solar postdiluvian year. Nor, con- sidering the proximity and intercourse which must have existed in these early times between the Hebrews and Egyptians, can it be supposed unreasonable to infer, that the latter were more or less familiar with the Hebrew mode of com- puting time. National jealousy, however, secured an adhesion to the prevailing systems of the age, which Taid the foundation of claims, in their be- half, of an antiquity higher than that of the Hebrew race. » Summary, etc., by Dr. Soyffarth, pp. 86, 87. a See pp. 88, 84, of this work. Accordingly, from the first of the Hermaic books, and the especial computation of the author of the system, we have the Genesis of Egyptian antiquity. From it the author of the old Egyp- tian Chronicle (Hermes Trismegistus) had the Zodiacal period of 36,525 years, which was divided, 1st, into the antediluvian period, as the era of the reign of the gods for three myri- ads, or 30,000 years ; 2d, the postdiluvian pe- riod, attributed to the demigods, to whom were assigned a reign of 3984 years; and 3d, the reign of men, for a period of 2324 years. Hence the name of Manetho's Egyptian His- tory, to wit, the Book of Sothis, from Sirius, the dog-star — the great canicular period of 36,525 years. Now, of the antediluvian period, as above; em- bracing 30,000 years as the reign of the gods, extending as it did from the beginning of time to Typhon, the murderer of his brother , Osiris (i. e., to the flood — for Typhon signifies the sea, as Osiris the mainland), we are informed by Cen- sorinus, Horapollo, and others, that the Egyptian word abot, hahot (complexus), signified not only a year, but also a month and a season of two months. Consequently Manetho, etc., were au- thorized to calculate times according to the short- er years, without contradicting the other historical tradition of their nation. Hence, for the purpose of establishing a history of 36,525 years, called Sothis, Manetho turned solar into lunar months by multiplication, as we find it also among the ancient Chaldeans, etc. He therefore regarded the above antediluvian period of 30,000 years for the reign of the gods as so many lunar months, and there- fore reckoned only 2424 solar years for that whole period, ending with the deluge, from which point Egyptian history commences. And hence. The postdiluvian period. — This era embraces, first, the reign of the demigods, or Mestrseans, 3984 years from the deluge, to Menes, the first king of Egypt, and which, expressing a season of two months each, give 664 solar years. Second, the continuation of the Egyptian monarchy through thirty dynasties, down to the overthrow of their last king, Nectanebus II., by the Persian Ochus, in the twentieth year of his reign, b. c. 430, embracing a period of 2424 years ; and to the Nativity, of 2854 years. Waiving, for the present, a further comparison of the Hermaic with the Hebrew numbers, I would observe : while it is generally agreed tha the Book of Genesis was written by Moses whe . in the land of Midian, between the fortieth at eightieth years of his age, the exact date it 38 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. impossible to fix with certainty, save that it falls in some year between his manhood and the time of the exode, i. e., from his twentieth to his eightieth year. We may be warranted, there- fore, in computing the difference in the excess of the Hermaic over the Hebrew date of the deluge at 350 years. Then, by dividing the excess of the Hermaic above the Mosaic diluvian era of 350 years, by the excess of the Hermaic estimate of equinoctial precession above the truth, we ob- tain a clue to the increase of the star's longitude between the deluge and the date of the Hermaic Genesis — thus : The Egyptian Zodiacal period, set forth in that book at 36,525 vague years, equals 36,500 fixed Sothoic or Julian years. This period, divided by 360 deg., gives the rate of precession 101 years 142 days, or lOl^V years to a degree ; and 101 j'g- — 1\\ (the true rate) = 29| years for the Hermaic excess of time in each degree's preces- sion. But 350 years, as above, -h29f =11 deg. 12 min. 36 sec, the precession since the deluge; and 11 deg. 42 min. 36 sec. X lOl/g^llSYi years for the Hermaic period. In like manner, 11 deg. 42 min. 36 sec. x'71^=83'7i- years for the true — the difference being 350 years. SECTION II. Direct evidence, derived from historic facts, of the corruption of the original Hebrew Chronology hy the Jews, both before and after the time of Christ. Wk here arrest the production of further evi- dence demonstrative of the corruption of the Hebrew standard of chronological computations by the Egyptians, deeming additional facts to that end superfluous. We have shown, first, that the astronomical epoch of the Sermaic Genesis, and the age of its reputed author, Hermes Trismegistus, are the same : second, that both fall in the days of the Mosaic histo- ries : third, that the state of learning in Egypt at the time was precisely such as to render the corruption above exhibited not only probable but inevitable. This was made to appear by a calculation of the age of the Hermaic Genesis, as computed from its own astronomical elements, and especially from its substitution, like that of the Chaldeans before them, of the false estimate of 101^ years to a degree of equinoctial preces- sion, in the place of the true, at 71^ years to a degree. I now remark, that this Hermaic corruption of the original Hebrew Scriptures by the Egyptians is of incalculable importance ; — because, 1st, it re- fers the inspired and parent record of time to its true antiquity ; and because, 2d, it shows the first origin of the system of chronological cor- ruptions, afterwards so extensively adopted by others in their translations of the original He- brew Scriptures into Greek. I shall now, therefore, in reliance upon the reader's indulgence, and the importance of the subject in hand to the interests of truth in these " LAST TIMES," procccd at once to trace, in the light of historic fact, the evidence that, after the example of the Egyptians, and from motives of national vanity, the Jews, both before and after the time of Christ, have been guilty of a wilful and deliberate corruption of the Hebrew version of the historic and prophetic numbers. This, it will be said, is taking high ground. As an offset to our position, however, we do not ask or expect the assent of the reader to this statement, unless it can be proved, first, from in- ternal Scriptural evidence, that the present He- brew numbers are the original Mosaic annals ; and unless, second, every objection, whether on historical or physical grounds, can be fairly met and answered : in a word, unless we can demon- strate that the original Hebrew Chronology, in its translations, has been subjected to various corruptions by different hands and at different times, and that these corruptions have kept pace in exact proportion or agreement with the differ- ent stages of corrupt astronomical developments. If, then, it can be shown that the chronology of the Hebrew version, from the period whence its history commences, and particularly from the PERIOD OF THB DELUGE ONWARD, exhibits a gen- eral agreement throughout with the astronomical precession of the equinoxes at the rate of "71 J years to a degree, while that of the corruptions made of it exhibits the same general agreement with the ancient erroneous equinoctial precession at the rate of lOlA years to a degree — the inevi- table conclusion will be, that the Hebrew, and NOT THE SePTUAGINT VERSION, IS ALONE AUTHOR- itative in determining the chronology of Scripture. It will also follow hence, that the alleged cor- ruptions of the Hebrew Scriptures themselves, as made by the Jews either before or after the time of Christ, for the purpose of proving that He was OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 39 not the true Messiah, falls to the ground, and therefore that, though the Jews, at the time of Christ's first advent and subsequently, did assert on chronological grounds that He was an impos- tor, yet that that assertion rested on entirely dif- ferent chronological data from that aflSrmed by the Septuagintarians. Now, then, as to the circumstances of time, place, and the persons by whom — as historical facts, etc., demonstrate — the several perversions of the Hebrew translated numbers transpired. Of these there are eight ; namely — L The first Jewish corruption consisted of an imperfect Greek translation, made before the time of Alexander, b. c. 465. II. The original Samaritan corrnption was made b. o. 345, etc. III. The numerical Roman corruption was made b. c. 296. IV. The numerical Alexandrine corruption was made b. c. 265. These last two, both copies of the Septuagint, fell in the days of the seventy Greek translators. V. The Hellenistic Samaritan corruption was made b. c. 141. VI. The era of the Traditional numbers (adopted by Josephus and most of the Christian Fathers), with various modifications, falls b. c. 109, in the time when the expectation of Mes- siah first commenced. VII. The epoch of the Clementine numbers, which were manifestly designed as a corruption of Josephus, accordingly falls a. d. 114, between the times of Josephus, a. d. 70, and of Clemens, A. D. 200. And, VIII. The modern Jewish corruption, resulting from the Arabian altered precession, comes out A. D. 813, at the time when the first modern chronicle, bearing date a. d. 832, was jjomposed. In order to have a clear view of the subject in the outset, it will be well to note the general chronological characteristics of the three versions — the Hebrew, the Samaritan, and the S^ptua- gint. They are the following : First — The Hebrew antediluvian numbers ex- ceed those of the Samaritan by 349 years. Second — The Samaritan, while it falls short of the Septuagint antediluvian numbers 995 years, yet, with the exception that it rejects the second Cainan introduced into that copy, it corresponds with it throughout in enlarging the postdiluvian eras. Third — The Septuagint not only enlarges the antediluvian numbers, compared with the He- brew, 606 years, and with the Samaritan 995 years, but, while it Agrees with the Samaritan in general on the postdiluvian numbers, it goes against both the Hebrew and the Samaritan in the adoption of the second Cainan. Again, Fourth — It will be shown in the sequel, that while there is but one discrepancy in the chro- nology of the Hebrew, there are several in thai of the Septuagint. Finally — Ecferring the reader to the variations of the three versions on the total of years between the creation and the nativity, as exhibited in page 15 of this work, the following, from the same versions (which it may be of use to introduce here), will show the difi'erences between the cre- ation and the deluge : According to the Hebrew text it is 1656 years. " " Samaritan " 130T " " " Septuagint " ■ 2262 " In the elucidation of the subject before us, it will be well to bear in mind the following Rules. Admitting that the postdiluvian periods of the Samaritan and Greek accounts were constructed from the observed quantity of equinoctial pre- cession, between the diluvian era and the date of each corruption, at the rate of 100 years to a degree; and the original antediluvian period to have been reduced by the Samaritan and pro- longed by the Greek corrupters in the ratio of the postdiluvian increase ; then, as we are in pos- session of the antediluvian periods so produced, as well as of the antediluvian and postdiluvian diflferences, it follows — 1st. That as the deficiency of the Samaritan below the original antediluvian period is to the original antediluvian ^period, so is the Samaritan postdiluvian excess to the increased period from the deluge to the date of corruption. 2d. As the excess of the Greek Septuagint above the original antediluvian period is to the increased antediluvian period, so is the Greek postdiluvian excess to the increased period from the deluge to the date of corruption. It will hence be seen that the eras of corrup- tion thus obtained in the Samaritan and Greek years of the flood respectively, when reduced to equinoctial precession at the rate of a degree in 100 years, and the precession thus obtained re- duced back into true time at a degree in 71^ years, the latter must of necessity furnish the true dates of the respective corruptions in the years of the original diluvian era, and the cor- responding years before Christ. This will appear in the annexed table, in which the numbers of the Roman Codex of the Septuagint and of Jo- sephus are included ; 40 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED, •pa 'F-d vA = i H »* S^ <§ ■«1 fk TBS. TR8. TBS. JosEPniTS . 600 2266 : : 700 Samaritah . 849 1686 : : 590 LXX. EOMAN . 5S6 2242 : : T50 LXX. AlEXASDBIAN. . 606 2262 : : 789 < ■«S WO =3 O <0 s o SB TBS. a TKS. DKO. IIIN. SEO. TB8. TBS. 2682 -T- 100 = 26 19 12 X 71} = 1882 ....465 2799i -1. 100 = 27 59 42 X 71i = 2002 845 100 = 28 41 04 X 71i = 2061 296 100 = 29 07 00 X 71i = 20Sli 265 2911i With the way thus prepared before us, I shall now proceed to a consideration of — I. The FiBST Jewish corruption of the Hebrew text. As will be perceived from the above Table, the era of Josephus's numbers comes out b. c. 465. It is to be observed, however, as will be seen hereafter, that his chronology is obviously a distinct corruption from that of the LXX, differ- ing from the original Hebrew by just thirteen centenary additions. The above number of 465 years evidences the existence of a Greek trans- lation older than that of the Samaritan, which is placed at b. c. 345 ; or than either the LXX, or Ezra's Hebrew edition. Accordingly, we learn from the commentary on the Pentateuch dedi- cated by Aristobulus, the Jewish Peripatetic phi- losopher, to Ptolemy Philometer, and cited by Clemens and Eusebius, that there was a» imper- fect Greek translation made before the time of Alexander, whence, as some think, Pythagoras and Plato had their philosophy. The above date, however, falls about midway between the times of these philosophers, and would therefore exclude the former ; but its agreement with the age of Piato is infinitely the most important. This era agrees v;»ith the times of Herodotus, Xenophon, and Ctesias, who all visited the Per- sian empire, and whose harmony with sacred history, as well as that of Berosus after them, is truly surprising. Might not Herodotus have taken his account of Sennacherib from this trans- lation ? It is certain that the Jews at this time in the Persian empire must have come in contact with the travelling philosophers and historians of Greece ; and the idea of a translation into Greek, in which the sacred numbers were altered ac- cording to the Chaldean astronomical observa- tions and standard of precession, is by no means incongruous. If so, this was the first corruption of the sacred numbers, and set the example to — II. The Samaritans. We are now treating of the first, or original corruption, by the Samari- tans, of the Hebrew Scriptures. In order to present this matter fully before the reader, the following facts will be found in place. The Samaritan associates of Manasseh, who married the daughter of the Persian satrap of Samaria, and who was expelled Jerusalem by Nehemiah in or after the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, b. c. 438,' were descend- ants of the colonists brought by King Esar- haddon to Samaria from Pabylon, Susa, and other parts of the Assyrian empire, who main- tained their several systems of idolatry till the introduction of the Jewish rites by Manasseh.' Now, it cannot be doubted that these colonists brought with them the arts and sciences, as well as tlie religion of their respective nations; and we know the Babylonians had recorded observa- tions reaching nearly to the diluvian era, and were of all ancient nations the most addicted to astronomical observations. On applying, there- fore, the above Chaldean astronomical criterion to the Samaritan date of the deluge, it appears (granting the standard to be valid) that the chro- nology of their first version is of the date of the first introduction of the Law among the idol- atrous colonists of Samaria by the apostate Ma- nasseh. For, at this time it was that they formed a new version of the Law, in opposition to that restored by Ezra a few years before ; and that they should thus set up a new chronological system in opposition to that of the Jews, is surely in perfect keeping with all this, and the unceas- ing hostility which subsisted between the Jews and Samaritans, from the first establishment of the latter in Palestine through all succeeding ages. As stated above, the Samaritan chronology of the antediluvian era falls short of the Hebrew 349 years. On the supposition, therefore, that the time whence their calculations were made was about the period of the deluge (the focus from which all these calculations were made), they commenced their work by shortening the patriarchal centuries. On the other hand, in reference to the postdiluvian era, with the ex- ception of their omission of the second Cainan (about whom at this time they knew nothing), their chronology, as I have said, corresponds generally with the augmented chronology of the Septuagint. > Neh. xiii. 6, 80 ; Joseph. Antiq., xi. 7. ' 2 Kings xvii. 24, 80 ; Ezra iv. 2, 9 ; Joseph. Antiq^ xi. 7. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 41 If, now, we turn back to the time of the intro- duction of the Law among the Samaritans, b. c. 409, and about thirty years after their first set- tlement in Samaria, from the observations then made it appears that the longitude of the stars had increased twenty-seven degrees, — which coin- cides very nearly with the expiration of the first seven prophetic weeks of Daniel, in the time of Darius Nothus. Making their calculations, there- fore, according to the Chaldean standard of 100 years to a degree, the Babylonish associates of Manasseh increased the current Hebrew postdi- luvian period of 1938 to 2700, — the difference, as arising from the twenty-seven degrees of pre- cession during the current period as above, con- sisting of 762 years. This difference of time will be found exactly in proportion of the dif- ference between the ancient and true preces- sion of the equinoxes, from the diluvian era to the introduction of the Law among the Samar- itans, B. 0. 409, as will be seen in the following Table : HEBEEW. 8AMAEITAN. YKS. YBB. PBEOESSIOK TR8. YES. PKEOESBION. From Delnge to 16th year of Darlns Nothus 1938 at 71i = 87° 05' 46" 2700 at 100 = 27° 00' 00" Thence to Sativlty 409. 409 Delnge to same, 2347 It is here to be specially borne in mind, that the calculations herein made are in accordance with their proximate position to the current chronology of the Hebrew version, as given by Archbishop TJsher, of 4004 years as the date of the Nativity from the creation. It has hence been deemed unadvisable to alter them in adap- tation to the standard date for the Nativity of 4132 years, as adopted in this work, for the rea- son that the same results follow the application of the difference as arising from the twenty-seven degrees of precession to the true as to the false dates. For example : computing the year b. c. 409, as the date of the first introduction of the Law among the Samaritans, to have fallen on the true date of the Hebrew chronology, a. m. 2070 from the deluge, instead of 1938, as in the common version ; and that of the Samaritan — agreeably to the difference in the equinoctial precession of 100 years to a degree, in the place of 7lJ years (being the difference, as above, of 762 years of the false over and above the true) — to have fallen on a. m. 2832, instead of 2700, and precisely the same results will be found to follow; thus — THE SAMAKITAN COEEtJPTION. 1938 409 2347 2700 8109 2S4T 762 THE IKDB HEBREW. 2070 2832 409 2479 409 8241 2479 762 By a reference to our tabular views, it will be seen that the Samaritan date, b. c. 409, coin- cides with A. M. 3725, — being the 13th year of the reign of Darius Nothus (Prideaux makes it 15 years), the very year of the expiration of the first seven prophetic weeks of Dan. ix. 24-27. It hence follows, that the corrected chronology of 6 8109 2347 762 this period is confirmed altogether independent of the astronomical test as furnished in the pre- ceding Table. Following the progress of corruptions in hand in a strictly chronological course of development, the next in order claiming notice are — III. The numerical Koman, and ) , , IV. The numerical Alexandrine, ) ° *'°P ies of the Sbptctagint. By turning to the Table on page 40, it will be seen that the date of the Roman Codex of the LXX comes out a. m. 2869, B. c. 296, being the 10th year of Ptolemy Lagus, according to the canon of Ptolemy ; and that of the Alexandrine Codex, a. m. 2911,' B. c. 265, corresponding with the 20th year of Ptolemy Philadelphus : the mean difference b. c, 281 or 280, being the 4th or 5th of the latter king, varies only 3 or 4 years from the com- mencement of the labors of the LXX Greek trans- lators in his 8th year. A few remarks are here called for, by way of explanation of the peculiar circumstances of the Alexandrian Jews, for some time anterior to the translation of their Scriptures into Greek, While the Jews of Palestine, Syria, and Persia had retained a knowledge and use of the Syro- Chaldee, those of Alexandria were subjected to that change in language which invariably fol- lows, in the line of cause and effect, the inter- course of one nation with that of another tongue. Hence, though the Jews of Alexandria repelled > The Roman and the Alexandriije numbers, during tho interval of 81 years, may be considered to furnish 1m>o stages, as it is well known that the version of the LXX was composed and revised at different times, at each of which the prevailing system of chronological corruption would doubtless influence the compilers or editors. The dififer- ence of the copies of that version now extant is evidence of this. 42 OUK BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. all amalgamation with alien blood, and tena- ciously adhered to their own religion, yet thky HAD ENTIRELY LOST THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE LANGUAGE OF THEIR HeBREW ANCESTORS. The consequence was, that in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, the Jewish parents of Alexandria being unable to read, and their children, already addicted to the GreeTc tongue, being unable to learn, the " Law" of their forefathers, there was left no alternative but a total loss to them of a knowledge of the contents of the inspired vol- ume, or its translation into the only language with which they were conversant. It is also un- deniable, that at this period the Jews were the most ignorant in human learning of all the ancient civilized nations. And, whatever were the causes which originated the undertaking — whether from a mere desire, according to Aris- tseus, to place in the Alexandrian Library a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures translated into Grefek, or to meet the wants of the Jews — suffice it to say, that the work, being resolved on, was con- fided to the execution of seventy Jews, who, had their integrity as translators borne a due proportion with their ability to accomplish the task assigned them, both Jewish and Christian chronologists, ancient and modern, had been spared alike the time, labor, and litigations ex- pended in the adjustment of its chronological details. We must here, however, take into the account the fact, that while the Jews thought not, at the first, of the ingenious mode of raising their antiquity beyond the scale of their original uncorrupted records, yet, having become, on the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah, mixed with the nations among whom astronomical science was cultivated, they succumbed to the prototype furnished them at the hands of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, etc. ; which, taken in connection with the first two examples of corruption above named, prepared the way for their adoption, by the LXX, of the same principle afterwards so extensively practised. That the position here assumed in regard to the LXX does not rest on mere conjecture, it will be well to state in this connection the facts following. In the first place, the LXX inter- preters had free access to the extensive treasures of history and learning then embraced in the Alexandrian Library. From these, it is scarcely to be doubted that they became possessed of the cardinal points of a date at least as early as the deluge; and that, according to the unanimous opinions of the ancients, that time began when the vernal equinox was in Taurus, and the sum- mer solstice in Leo (i. e., between the years b. c. 4665 and 2520), and finding that their own Hebrew numbers, according to the astronomical system prevalent in their time, were deficient as high as that era ; and when we reflect, also, on the rivalry among ancient nations on the sub- ject of antiquity, it is, certainly, no great stretch of one's credulity to believe that they were in- duced to avail themselves of the precedents be- fore them, and thus to raise the antiquity of their sacred records and of their nation. Then add to this the fact — Second, That at the time of the above trans- lation the learned men of all nations were then assembled at the court of that munificent patron of literature. King Ptolemy ; and that the cele- brated historians and astronomers, Berosus and Manetho, were their contemporaries, and probably intimates. Both these writers appropriated the annals of the patriarchal ages exclusively to the records of their respective nations ; and while the LXX Elders were employed in interpreting the Genesis of Moses and the rest of the inspired annals, Manetho, the Egyptian priest, was simi- larly occupied in interpreting the Egyptian his- tory from the Genesis and other books of Hermes ; — both parties at the instance of the same royal patron. Now, that the present Hebrew numbers, com- pared with those of the LXX interpreters of the Septuagint, hold the same relation to truth as does the equinoctial precession of 1 degree in 'l\\ years, compared with the ancient computa- tion of 1 degree in a century ; in other words, that the excess of the Septuagint over those of the true Hebrew numbers, is in exact proportion of the difference between the rate at which the pre- cession of the- equinoxes was estimated by the Egyptian, Chaldean, and Greek astronomers, down to the times of Hipparchus, Claudius Ptol- emy, and Proclus — and which was followed by most of the ancient fathers and chronographers — of 1 degree in a century, and the true preces- sion of 1\\ years to a degree, will appear from the following Table : — ' » The reader is here apprised that the origin of the numbers In the current version, and those of the Alex- andrine Codex of the LXX, was, occasioned by the erro- neous date given in the former of 1 Kings vi. 1, and the true chronology of that period as given by St. Paul, Acts xiii. 17-22, making a difference of 123 years ; and which all chronologists, till within a few years, have either. en- tirely overlooked, or failed properly to adjust. As in the preceding case, the same coincidence prevails in the ap- plication of the true and the false precessions to the cor- reoted chronology, a ciroumstanoe which cannot but fur- nish evidence strongly confirmatory of the chronology of OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 43 HEBREW. PRTtOESSION. Creation to Delngo 165C at Tl} = 280 9' 89' Deluge to Stli year of Ptolemy PhiladelphuB 2070 at 711 = 28° 5T' GEEEK. PKEOESeiOW. at 100 = 22° 8T' 12" 4" 2902 at 100 = 29° 87' 12" Creation to 8th year of Ptolemy Philadelphna 8726 at 714 = 62° 6' 43" 5221 at 100 = 52° 14' 24" From 8th year of Ptolemy Philadelphas to Nativity 277 277 Creation to same 4003 8601 I here remark, that it does not fall within the scope of my design in this work to enter any ftirther into the details of the Septnagint chro- nology in this connection, than what is deemed necessary to prove the corruption of the Hebrew numbers by the LXX translators, in the manner herein represented. It were easy to show that similar results to the above would follow a com- parison of the intermediate dates. From the preceding Table alone, however, the extraordinary coincidence between the true and the false num- bers, as arising from the difference of the true, compared with the false, degrees of equinoctial precession between the Greek eras of the creation and deluge and the 8th year of Ptolemy Phila- delphus (the year when the LXX began their translation), compared with the Hebrew dates of the same events, — the difference of a few min- utes from the quantity of the true precession not affecting the general scheme — I say, this coinci- dence, so far from being merely accidental, car- ries with it most irrefragable evidence of design on the part of the LXX ; and that, like the original corruption by the Samaritans before them, they set about to alter and enlarge the He- brew numbers, agreeably to the astronomical Egyptian standard then in use. V. The next instance • of corruption is that of the Hellenistic Samaritans. It is here to be noted, that part of the inhabitants of Samaria, as well as of Jerusalem, were transported to Alexan- dria by the Macedonian kings ; and also, that both people (i. e., the Jews and the Samaritans) As 349 : 3 !■§ ■■s'% a 1656 i go Pi 650 We here subjoin a Table of the Samaritan Ju- dicial Era from the Exode to the 2d year of Solo- mon, of 744 years. This era, computed at 746 years, and that of the kings at 443 years, corre- sponds with the Roman Codex of the LXX, followed by Eusebius. But in Africanus's Times the above period as we find it in Acts xiii. 17-22. The diaorepanoy betweea the two passages will be fully dis- cussed In the sequel. (See Cliron. Table, No. I., Period IV., and Notes.) were engaged in perpetual contests about the sa- credness of the two temples of Jerusalem and Mount Gerizim (which latter the Samaritan in- terpolations pointed out as the true place of wor- ship),' from the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus to that of Ptolemy Philometer.' Hence, about 144 years after the corruption of the Hebrew version by the Hellenistic Jews of Alexandria in the year b. c. 265, and about 268 years below the date of* their first corruption in the year b. c. 409, the Hellenistic Samaritans, in the year b. c. 141, produced a Greek version,, in which the sa- cred eras were further raised, proportionably to the increased astronomical error of its date. As before stated, the Samaritans omitted the 130 years of the second Cainan in their first copy; and, though foisted into the Septuagint by the LXX, they still continued to reject it as spu- rious in their new Greek version. Another alter- ation in their postdiluvian numbers of the patri- archal generations, consisted of their placing Terah's death at his 145th year, giving only 590 years to the Hebrew generations between the times of Shem and Terah ; whereas Abraham was 75 years old at the death of Terah, in his 205th year. By restoring, therefore, the 60 years erroneously abstracted from the life of Terah, and computing the above period at 650 instead of 590 years, on the one hand, and cor- recting the diluvian era of the current Hebrew version on the other, the calculation in reference to this second Hellenistic version of the Samari- tans will stand as follows : 2^ 8084 J- 100 PEEOESSION. 30° 50' 83' I U ID d X 7H = o go '55 -a ia *^ 8205 B. 0. 141. of the Judges — which contain several interpola- tions found nowhere else, and which that chro- nographer certainly did not invent, but compiled either from the Samaritan Book of Judges or the 6heek version of the LXX, as inserted in the Armenian Codex of Eusebius — this judicial era stands at 744 years (stated in round numbers at 740 by Syncellus), as follows : > Prideanx, Part II., pp. 606, 607. » Josephus's Antiq., L. xii. 1, and xiii. 4. 44 OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMIN-RD. [827T] Call of Abraham to Bxode. YB8. . 480 8707 S74T 8772 4410 4450 4451 44S7 Fr. Exode. 1 41 66 96 5S6 676 704 741 745 Exode to death of Moses ••• *J] Thence to death of Joshua „„l-r. v -u t _ ]j)4ej5 80 VEuseb. pr. Evang., L.X. Judges and Servitudes *9J [ Eli Mid Sumuel ;^" J Saul ■. 2» David *" _ , ,„ Solomon ' 1 Sequel, p. 181. ■ an. ii. Temp. Com. . . ■ an. yiii. Temp. Ded. 744 Euseb. Chr. Armen., L. 1. p. 156, Now, the enormous excess in the time of the Judges, as exhibited in the above Samaritan numbers over both the original Hebrew and all the preceding Jewish corruptions, and which ranges between 157 and 256 years, is immedi- ately accounted for on reference to the system of Julius Africanus. This chronographer, as Syn- cellus tells us, although he adopted the antedilu- vian period of the Alexandrine copy of the LXX, as more reconcilable with the traditional era of the creation at b. c. 5500, yet considered the Samaritan Codex as the original of the Penta- teuch ; and hence adopted its postdiluvian patri- archal numbers, and, with that version, also re- jected the second Cainan. Finally, on this sub- ject : That Julius Africanus derived his chronol- ogy from the Samaritan Books of Judges and Kings, now lost (see page 29 of this work), is evident from the fact, that he could not have obtained his interpolations of this period, nor placed the Temple's foundation in the 2d year of Solomon, from either the Greek or the Hebrew. Having, then, treated of the five original Jewish and Samaritan corruptions, or those cases in which the numbers of the sacred text were altered, let us now proceed to the three remaining or secondary Jewish stages — or those computa- tions of time which arose from the previous altera- tions, as combined with the progressive astronom- ical error — by introducing to the reader's notice — VI. The next period of corruption in chrono- logical order. This is that of the Traditional numbers, which falls in with about the year b. c. 103, in the time when the expectation of the Messiah's coming filled the Jewish mind. This era was called, by Syncellus and others, "Apostolic," and of which — as it was computed to fall in A. M. 5501, according to the Alexan- drine Codex — John MalaFa, who adopted it (Chron., L. x., sub. init.), thus accounts : "As God created man on the sixth day, according to the testimony of Moses (who also witnesses that a day and a thousand years are the same with the Lord, Ps. xc. 4), and as man then fell into sin, it seems altogether consistent that in the sixth millenary our Lord Jesus Christ should appear on earth to redeem mankind by his passion and resurrection." From the above it will be perceived that the year a. m. 5601 assigns the Messiah's coming to the middle of the sixth millenary. This con- jecture was based on the hypothesis, that as the evening and night, or first half of the sixth demi- urgic day, preceded the creation of man ; so the night, or first half of the sixth millenary from the creation, would precede Messiah's advent, etc. ; and which, as it was reckoned to commence from the destruction of the ancient kingdom of Judah and the temple, and was to continue during Daniel's " seventy weeks," harmonizes exactly with the Jewish epoch of the seventy weeks from the fiist temple's destruction ; and therefore stamps this traditional system, like the preceding corruptions, with a Jewish origin. The invention of this corrupt era is attributed by some writers to the high priest John Hyrca- nus (who had the reputation of being a prophet, Jos. Antiq., xiii. 10), in the 27th year of his reign, being the year of the destruction of Sa- maria by that prince, b. o. 103. Now, taking the traditional era of the creation, b. c. 5601, followed by Africanus, Nicephorus, etc., com- pared with the Alexandrine, b. c. 5439, and the former exceeds the latter by precisely 62 years. These 62 years, subtracted from the date of the Alexandrine numbers of the LXX, b. c. 265, show a corruption of 155 years later than the last, placing it at about b. c. 109 or 110; and the same 62 years added to the 780, whereby the original postdiluvian generations are increased in the Alexandrine numbers, making a total of 842 years, we obtain the following results, namely : As 606 3 .Sd > o a '3 11 842 g ** to 8130 2 a 5-2 ■^ ffl Oh I& a P&EOBeSIOET. -1- 100 = 81° 17' 54" X TIJ = 3283 — 8847 a s 109. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 45 As this important subject, in reference to the above Jewish calculations regarding the time of Messiah's coming, will be further considered in a subsequent part of this work, we pass to — VII. The epoch of the Clbmentink numbers. This system form? the last stage of the enlarged astronomical corruptions of the Hebrew numbers, and ascends above all those which preceded it. Clemens, who flourished between a.d. 188 and 218, was a native of Alexandria. He wrote be- tween A. D. 193 and 210. He estimated the 200th year a. d. as the SYSitb year of the world, and computed the creation at b. c. 5584. But as, according to his mundane and diluvian eras, the date of the destruction of the temple was fixed at two different periods — viz., b. c. 588 and 610 (corresponding with the difference of 22 years between the Persian era of Cyrus, b. c. 560, and the Babylonian, b. c. 538, which were confounded by the Fathers) — Clemens's double system of numbers is accounted for, together with the variations of his Adamic era of 5584, from other chronological elements of his work. But an examination of Clemens's system car- ries with it the evidence that his design was a correction of Josephus. For, while he follows the patriarchal chronology of the Jewish histo- rian ; and, with him, Theophilus, Julius Africa- nus, Eusebius, and indeed all the early chronog- raphers, down to the age of Constantine, rejected the second Cainan as spurious ; he, nevertheless, enlarges it, by adding 215 years of servitude to Israel in Egypt, to the 430 years of scgournment ; which servitude and sojournment, the Jews, Jo- sephus, and nearly all others, except Theophilus of Antioch, divided equally between the last number. This augments the 700 years added to the original postdiluvian numbers in the first Jewish corruption, and adopted by Josephus, to 915 years in the chronology of Clemens, thus : JOSEPHUS. CLEMENS. Creation to Deluge 2256 [21481 Deluge to birth oflsaao 1092 p250] Thence to Exode 405 Thence to Conquest 46 Added by Clemens 215 Birth of Isaac to Conquest 4014 .[_616^] 4014 The method of Clemens's attempted correction of Josephus may be seen by comparing his three numbers, in crotchets, with the 2256-f 1092 -f 666 of the former. Both come out 4014 years, the additional 215 years being in the latter sum- total : 700-1-215 = 915. Now, by taking the diluvian era of Clemens at 2148, as in the above Table, and deducting it from the year of the creation, 5584, it places the diluvian era at b. c. 3436 ; and then, by deduct- ing therefrom the true Hebrew era of the deluge, b. c. 2476, it gives an excess over the latter of 960 years. But 960 years, divided by 28^ years, the dif- ference between the ancient and true years of precession, gives 34° 3' 4" for the precession from the deluge to the era of his system; and 34° 3' 4" X 71^=2476 years, the true interval since the deluge; and b. c. 2476 — 2590 = 114 years, as the date of this corruption of the sacred numbers. As, therefore, the diluvian era of Clemens and that of the patriarchal periods both produce the same results, it follows, that while it augments the Adamic era compared with all preceding sys- tems, so it was based on a similar astronomical origin with the previous Jewish corruptions. We therefore dismiss Clemens, and pass to the last in our categoiy, viz. : Vni. The MODERN Jewish corruption. There is a difference of opinion as to the era of this system. The chronology o^ Josephus, however, affords ample proof that it was subsequent to his time ; while Prideaux (Preface, Part 11.) shows that their seven modern chronicles were com- posed between a. d. 832 and a. d. 1592. The first of these was that of Seder Olam Kabbah, and bears date, according to R. Azarius, a. d. 832, or 762 years after the destruction of Jeru- salem (Prid., uhi supra), — an intermediate date between that of the Babylonish Talmud, com- posed early in the sixth century (from which the above Sed. 01. Eab. contains large extracts), and that of the expulsion of the Jews from Babylonia and Mesopotamia by the Mohammedan princes, A. D. 1057. At the above date, viz., a. d. 832, the seat of Jewish learning was at their academies at Na- herda, Sora, Pombeditha, etc., in the province of Babylon ; where, and in the adjacent countries, science was then carried to a high pitch under the patronage of the Caliphs. The error of the ancient rate of equinoctial precession at 100 years to a degree, which had continued in partial 46 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. use till tlie time of Proclus Diadochus, in the sixth century, had been detected before or in the present age, and was now estimated by the Ara- bian astronomers at 66 years to a degree, by Albategnius, the great Arabian astronomer, who made his observations at Aracta, in Mesopotamia. Hence, as the rate of precession in use when the former corruptions were effected, produced an enor in excess of 28| years to each degree of precession ; so, the corrected Arabian estimate of 66 years to a degree, now prevalent, would fall short of the true rate of 11^ years to a de- gree, by 5^ years. When, therefore, we take into account the utter improbability that the principles adopted by their ancient doctors should have been for- gotten by the Jews of the middle ages, nothing is more reasonable than to expect, as the effect of their long-cherished antipathy to the Septua- gint version, they would set themselves to substi- tute, in the place of its expanded numbers com- paTed with the original, a system of chronology more consistent with their then national predilec- tions. And when we reflect that, coincident with the above Arabian discovery of the error of the an- cient estimate of equinoctial precession, the Jews, who flourished at the head-quarters of science at the time, were actually engaged in composing chronicles of their nation's history, we may ex- change conjecture into certainty, that they would set about correcting the astronomical mistakes of their predecessors ; the more so, because the prevailing astronomy of the ninth century enabled them not only to reject the excessive numbers of the Hellenistic Jews, but to curtail the original Hebrew reckoning itself, and thereby furnishing themselves with arguments both against the traditional date of Messiah's coming, and the right application of Daniel's prophecy. On the hypothesis, then, as above, that they proceeded on the basis of an astronomical calcu- lation analogous to those of former ages — the Arabian rate of equinoctial precession, being adopted as the standard — their deductions, in- stead of exceeding the original truth, would fall short of it. Accordingly, we find that, adopting the said standard of 66 years to a degree, they proceeded to curtail the original Hebrew postdiluvian num- bers (preserving the original antediluvian interval of 1656 years intact), in the proportion of 5i years helow the true precession of Tl^ years to a degree, in each degree's precession from the deluge. Hence, their Adamic and diluvian eras, being fixed at autumn in the years b. c. 3760 and 2104 — the greatest part of the contraction being in the times of the Persian empire — fell short of the common Hebrew version by 243 years. With this fact, therefore, in view, the result is as follows : Take 243 -^ 5l = 44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec, for the precession ; and 44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec. X 7I5 = 3159 years from the original dilu- vian era till that of the corruption ; and 44 deg. 10 min. 55 sec. X 66 = 2916 years from the Jewish era of the flood to the same. These pe- riods, which differ 243 years exactly, when com- puted from the above numbers respectively, con- duct us to A. D. 813, — differing 19 years only from the date of the Seder 01am Kabbah, a. d. 832, as above. Hence, this last era of corruption comes out one of the most critically exact in the whole series. I have thus conducted the reader through these eight stages of astronomical corruption of the original Hebrew Scriptures by the Jewish and Samaritan doctors, between the times of the return from Babylon and the breaking up of the Jewish academies in the East, in the eleventh century. The era of each, as resulting from the enlarged or contracted astronomical error (in vio- lation of Sir Isaac Newton's astronomical argu- ment to the Scriptural reckoning of time at 71^ years to a degree, which may well be considered a universal chronological key), as we have seen, ■ on comparison, all come out with so much of historical exactness, as to furnish the most in- dubitable evidence that, contrary to the usual hypothesis of the Septuagintarians, that the ver- sion of the LXX Greek translators is chrono- logically identical with the original Hebrew Scriptures, the Jewish and Samaritan doctors are responsible for having, both by the process of enlargements and contractions, altered and muti- lated the sacred records. The first stage of these corruptions, that of the Hermaic or Egyptian, deduced fiom the num- bers and epochs preserved by Manetho and San- choniathon from the Genesis of Hermes (now so popular with the modern Egyptologists, etc., etc.), and which furnished the original of the ingenious method of corrupting the Hebrew chronology so extensively adopted by the Jews and Samaritans (i. e. after they had become mixed with the more scientific nations of antiquity) ; while it throws unexpected light on the state of learning in the Egyptian seminaries at the time when the in- spired annalist, Moses, was among their students, it also points us to the Record containing the OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 47 original inspired computation to its proper anti- quity ; and furnishes an argument for the Divine origin of that Eecord, which cannot but prove interesting to such skeptical impugners of it, as the joint authors of " Types of Mankind," etc. The second additional stage, that of the Tra- ditional era of the Messiah's coming, adopted, with various modifications by Josephus, Theophi- lus, Eusebius, Africanus, Panadorus, Cedrinus, and nearly all the early Christian chronogra- phere, and bearing date at the time when the Messiah first began to be expected, arose from the erroneous computation, by the Jews, as I shall hereafter show, of the commencement of Dan- iel's " seventy weeks" with the destruction of the first Temple. The third additional stage was that of the Clementine numbers, which exhibits the last and highest stage of corruption by the Hellenistic Jews. The fourth and last results from the modern Jewish numbers ; and evinces that, as the sacred epochs had been progressively raised so long as the excessive estimate of equinoctial progression continued in use, they became depressed in the like proportion, when that estimate was ex- changed for a deficient one by the Arabiar astronomers. In connection with the above, it is deemed expedient, for the better understanding of the real merits of the questions involved, before pro- ceeding to details, to offer the following on the subject of the two leading systems of the distin- guished chronologists, Josephus and Dr. Hales : First. — In reference to Josephus, although, from Havercamp's chronological notice, prefixed to his edition of that historian's works, the reader would be led to conclude it in vain to look therein for a well-ordered system, the writings of others of his followers, from Isaac Vossius to Dr. Hales, might, on the other hand, induce him to suppose the writings of Josephus contained several systems, altogether different from each other. That the Jewish annalist, however, was, in his own way, a most methodical chronologist, and not to be misunderstood, will appear from the following outhne : Josephus twice acquaints us that the sacred canon of the Old Testament, ending with Nehe- miah's return to the Persian court in the 32d of Artax. Longiraanus, occupied a period of 5000 years.' Artaxerxes began to reign b. o. 464 : his 32d year, therefore, answers to b. c. 433. From thence ascending 5000 years, we arrive at the year b. c. 5483 for Josephus's era of crea- tion ; 6 years below the Alexandrine era, b. c. 5439. But the antediluvian period of Josephus is 2256 years ; of the Alexandrine, 2262 : both, therefore, conduct to the same diluvian era, b. c. 31'7'7. Thence, Josephus computes in the fol- lowing Table [in which the periods in brackets alone are his, the others resulting from the series of his numbers], thus : B. a 54*3 81T7 21S5 2110 1681 1090 620 570 A.D. 70 Creation to Deluge Delnge to birth of Abrahum Tlience to Call Call to Exode, 430 current , Exode to Temple, 592 current Call of Abraham to Temple Foundation to destruction of Temple Thence to 2d of Cyras Thence to 2d of Yespasian TBS. MO. B. ri656 01 Aniiq. 1. i 292 (1 Jd. ib. 75 Id. ib. Id. 1. iii. Id. 1. vlii. 1020 Id. ib. 470 fi 10 Id. 1. X. 50 a Ap. 1. i. 689 1 15 BeU. 1. Yi. Second Temple destroyed [5502 T 26] Thus the period of 6000 years, ending in the 32d of Artaxerxes Longimanus, is confirmed to a fraction ; and it is plain that Josephus's addi- tion to the times of the Persian empire is be- tween Cyrus and Artaxerxes, etc. It is also evi- dent, from the interval of 1020 years between the Call and the Exode, that the minor intervals of 430 and 592 years are both to be computed as current periods, or as 430 and 490 agreeably to the results of the fijst corruption, which Jose- phus follows, and to the Koman and Alexandrine numbers of the Septuagint. Again : It may be noticed, that when Josephus states that the sacred canon contained a period of 5000 years to the 3 2d of Artaxerxes, while it really terminates with the dedication of the sec- ond temple in the 6th of Darius Hystaspes, he appears to have reference to a calculation at- tached to the sacred books : and if so, this can be no other than the computation of the first corrupters, which, as above, comes out but a few years earlier, viz., the 21st of Xerxes, b. c. 465. This, therefore, seems a direct reference to the age of the reckoning adopted by Josephus, who used both the Hebrew and Greek eras of the Creation and Deluge, and commenced his fixed calculation only from the point at which the chronological differences cease — the birth op Abraham ; and in which Eusebius followed him. Of this, the annexed example may sufiBce : 1 Prajf. Antiq., Contra Apion, i. 8. See Euseb. Chr., numb. 1584. 48 OUK BIBLE CHROKOIiOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. B. 0. 4183 2417 2185 2110 16S1 1090 570 A. D. 70 TBS. HO. D. Creation to Deluge, 2656 [rend 1656 0] Deluge 10 birth of Abraham 292 ThencetoCall 76 Call to Exode, 430 current Exode to Temple, 592 current OalltoTemple 1020 Templestood «0 6 10 Creation to destruction of Temple 8518 6 10 Destructionof Temple to 2d of Cyrus 60 Tbenoe to 2d of Vespasian 639 1 16 Destruction of 2d Temple [4202 T 251 CormptioQ in antediluvian peTio6 [600 0] Do. postdOwoian do. [TOO 0] [6502 7 26] Antia. 1. 1. Id. lb. Id. ib. Id. 1. ill. Id. 1. viii. Id. ib. Id. 1. X. Id. ib. a An. 1. L BM. 1. 1. Aniia. \. i Id.<£b. In the above, all the periods not in crotchets are supplied by Josephus, while the others re- sult from the sum of his numbers. It is evident that the only diflference between the longer and shorter accounts (i. e., that of the original He- brew and of the Septuagint) are the 1300 years in the patriarchal generations, and that the pe- riod of 3513 years in the latter operates as a link to bind the whole, as does that of 5000 years in the former. Nothing can more plainly prove the whole system as one of double reckoning by the Jewish annalist, all whose numbers may be either reconciled with, or accounted for by, one or other of these calculations. It is absolutely impossible to deduce any other system than one of these two, always diflfering 1300 years in dates after Ahraham^s birth, from this writer. It must also be observed, that as the protracted reckoning of Josephus brings the termination of the 5000 which, according to tradition, were to elapse before the Messiah's coming, to the de- struction of Jerusalem, where the modern Jews fix the end of the " seventy weeks ;" therefore, the object of the one was to invalidate the tradi- tion, and the other the prophecy. Second. — In regard to Dr. Hales's Chronology, a work which professes to restore the true system, and which is adopted as of standard authority by a large class, introduces an era of creation as the true one of Moses and Josephus, which is abso- lutely erected on an error of Abulpharagius, or of his Latin translator. Dr. Pococke : for, this writer misquotes the Adamic era of Theophilus ; and yet, the very learned Dr. Hales uses this as the true epoch of the Christian chronologer : and, finding it to correspond with his assumed era of Josephus, adduces it in proof of that being the true Mosaic epoch of creation I Mr. Jackson, and Dr. Hales, who follows him, both assume the true era of the destruction of the kingdom of Judah, B. c. 686, as the basis of Josephus's sys- tem ; whereas nothing is more certain than that Josephus himself fixed that epoch in the year B. 0. 620, as shown in the two Tables above, and was therein followed by Africanus and others. Then, there is another egregious oversight in Dr. Hales's analysis, occasioned by introducing the Syncelline Catalogue of Egyptian Kings iu confirmation of his own diluvian era, assumed to be that of Moses and Josephus. The sum of this catalogue he takes from the particulars as cited in the Universal History, and computes it upwards, from the end of the last native Egyp- tian dynasty : but, unfortunately, the authors of the Universal History have altogether left out the twenty-seventh, or first Persian, dynasty, which makes a difference of 120 years, and therefore destroys any inference deduced from their cata- logue. It will be seen by the annexed Tables,' how, as the astronomical error increased by the lapse of years, the sacred epochs became progressively raised, at the rate of 28j years to each degree of precession, and 40 years in each successive cen- tury ; — a ratio that will be found exact in the variations from the original diluvian era (the root of all the computations), so long as the esti- mate of precession continued at 100 years to a degree ; for several stages of corruption are in- troduced in the Tables, in addition to those already mentioned. As these eras of corruption are not adventitious dates, but all come out his- torically right, so far as their historical elements have been preserved, it will be also seen that the Scriptural^ epochs and periods, resulting from the several eras of corruption, are not adventitious, but uniformly come out critically exact. Thus, the whole calculation depending on the respective patriarchal periods, these are of course fixed and invariable ; while the Scriptural period, from the call of Abraham to the Exode, 430 years, is recognized in all the versions. In the place of the 480 years, from the Exode to the 4th year of Solomon, as given in 1 Kings ' There may be the oooasionol difference of a ye ar in the dates of these Tables, — sometimes unavoidable in chconological calculations, — but never more. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 49 vi. 1, Josephus and others, by the addition of 111 years thereto, computed the period at 590 years. This, however, they effected, first, by the addition of half a century to the above period of 480 years, in connection with the 60 years of Terah's generation, by which all ancient chronographers raised the birth of Abraham, thereby producing the required period of the servitudes. The error here consisted, not in the adoption of the 590 years as an advance towards the true years of the above period, but in the mode of computing it, as will be shown in the sequel, when we come to adjust the discrepancy between 1 Kings vi. 1, and Acts.xiii. 17-22. 7 The construction pf the Tables on the basis of the current chronology is still adhered to, noth- ing more being necessary, in applying the several periods of corruption between the common and the corrected dates, as occasioned by the dis- crepancy between 1 Kings vi. 1, and Acts xiii. 17-22, than to -compute them backward from A. M. 4132, as the true epoch of the Nativity, as demonstrated in this work, instead of a. m. 4004. This may be readily done by a com- parison of the dates in these Tables with those in the column of Sacred Chronolo6t, in Table No. I. 50 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. "S •oS p t- ipOO"> Cf4 «D A OT)«o •a ft s ffi£Jg f;gg J* 1 o 1 tOcti rnrn Mm ( q »« o s ^ - 4 S ^»0-*« i S ost»o oow g i o o o s - 0« yi THr- ) b- OOCOC a ea CQ s •^' i-Kn. CO o lO w lOeOtM THrH i g (• 1 , d s 04 i 1 nil g S s ^«S SS*'^ « 5 ►- OO-*- ffl ■ 1 p] .^a £ «CO« r^ri i ^ :S . . , 1 5 co" 1^ Si 5 if ; g3 • 2 1 hi e li <: ^ 0«D«« ,n ^ 3 ~ iS ■^lO^t- ^ a 5| »< " a C4 ^«M COO«D 1 1-1 • n m •«i ^1 s e Hi ID ■i 1 1 § « i ill Is" s h n SI ■3 O il £ i III! 1 i cess sgg 3 -I Q < 1 a me, - Mx « 1 CO liii CO i mam 2'= JS is- < e3 0) - Md « fc oowc OS ^ f, -*3 SI tJ TO s § lis ssis « 1 bI ? (£ s CO llii i g SPI C»(»Cfi % c 03 a> 5 o fn 1 ctT 1— 1 ■if II CO ills i r^ ill OOWJO o o CC te OffiO Ji » S n f5 «c y ^^^' & fog P • 1 — v~ 'n W ■s 09 'i o •« C2 § ^ 1 fi^ ci o •II c S = io ^ 1 « a a ■§ 1^ i e'i g 1 s 1 ^ t < 2 t .4 a E c i3 First Jewish Corrupt! Original Sam. da Septusgint Cor. Eoma do. do. Alexa Hellenistic SanL Com Traditional Numbers. Si |l OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 51 !2i o HI tl Ph b » o O o OD o of 3 3 « OS as , bo CO -5 O S»SB§ SS a £ .« B « « X ■[-Mr: E§lg H O ® 3 m d tfl ca II S3 M p «a . III go 0! li| E B Eh X X o o o o •I- -I- 2? E To o li) I a s 62 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED, 1 A TABLE, Exhibiting the Progressive Astronomical Corruptions of the Saci-ed Hebrew Num- bers by the Egyptians, Jews, and Samaritans, from the publication of the Genesis of Hermes in the XVth Century B. c, to that of the Seder 01am Rabbah in the IXth Century of the Christian era. Systems derived from and illustrative of the foregoing. B. u. Hebrew. Her- Diaic. Jos. Numb. Bam. Heb. LXX Eom. LXX Alex. Sam. Greek. Trad. Numb. Olem. Numb. Mod. Jews. Jose- phus. AM- canus. Ense- bins. S684 Creation 5501 Creation Creation 5439 Creation 6433 Creation 5403 Creation 6353 Creation 6200 Creation 2242 4533 Creation 1307 2262 2256 2256 2262 4452 2256 Creation 1807 2242 2262 4245 4003 3896 Creation 350 1200 Gods. 1550 Creation 8760 8828 1666 Creation 1656 Deluge. 8239 Deluge. Deluge, 8226 Deluge. 8177 Deluge. Deluge. 8166 Deluge. Deluge. 3145 Deluge. Deluge. 1067 3097 2953 Deluge. 1017 2697 2347 2161 2224 DeJugo. 1017 1117 1147 1017 1207 1067 1067 1016 Deluge. 437 OalL Call. 480 2209 1 Call 2128 Call. 2110 Call. 2004 Delnge. 867 2049 Call. Call. 2032 2030 Call. Call. 1941 1920 1795 1779 Call. 429 Call. 439 Call. 411 480 480 430 430 430 430 645 ■■■429" Exodus. Exodus. 1787 Call. 425 1098 Exodus. 16S1 Exodus. 1619 Exodus. 1616 Exodus. 1602 Exodus. Exodus. 1600 Exodus. 1512 Exodus. 479 1509 1490 1312 1090 £xodufi Corrnp. 690 656 590 690 746 691 666 591 746 479 Exodus. 480 Temp. 1050 Temp. 1049 1033 Temp. 1029 1011 1010 882 Temp. 425 Temp. Temp. Temp. 470 429 Temp. 448 Temp. 424 Temp. 424 426 443 443 425 489 Temp. 410 620 Captiv. Captiv. 611 Captiv. 590 Captiv. 449 Oaptiv. 914 Eus. S. 686 465 483 Oaptiv. Captiv. Oorrup, 121 Captiv. 241 Captiv. 290 Captiv. 821 Oaptiv. 477 724 Captiv. 1284 6SB 841 Af.So. 422 846 Oorrup. Oorrup. Oorrup. Oorrup. 296 265 141 109 A.D.70 1 1± 200 Oorrup. 01.80. 222 825 818 1 1 Oorrup. 1 T 1 OUR BIBIjE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 53 A SCALE, Exhibiting the proportionate Elevation and Depression of the Dili^ian Era, in reference to each successive Era of Corruption, from B. c. 1509 to A. D. 813. „* The first division of each st'^e contains the Equinoctial Precession from the Deluge to the Era of Corruption ; tho second, the True Period between those eras on the left, with the excess of the Corrupted Diluvian Era on the right ; the third, the Corrupted Period from the Deluge to the date of corruption. B. a 8328 8239 8225 8UT 8166 8145 S09T 2697 284T 813 Corrup. Eatio of Error. Hebrew. Till. TO. VL T. IV. III. II. 1509 I. 100 465 IL 200 345 IIL 800 296 IT. 400 265 T. 600 141 TL 600 109 TIL TIIL 700 A. D. 114 800 IX. 819 279 289 199 159 119 79 42 900 Deluge. 2847 •g H Her- maic. Delu. Corr. Jos. Numb. Sam. Hebrew. Dolu. Corr. 1509 Ma Dclu. Corr. 465 sa LXX Kom. Delu. Corr. 845 as n 296 LXX Alex. Delu. Corr. Sam. Greek. Delu. Corr. 265 Trad. Numb. Delu. Corr. Clem. Numb. Delu. Mod. Jewish. Deluge. Corr. 141 So 00,5 109 it .si Corr. H J) a i Jfea fe * ^ 878 880 818 797 750 850 2002 2051 2081 2205 2283 2460 8159 This diagram nnintentionally flirnishes the idea of a pyramid, having the True Diluvian Era for its apex, and each d«=cend'»g sta^^ e JbUing^proTess of InereLng corruption, till the modern Jewish compilers, In severing the baseless errors of the ancients, also severed the apex or True DllQTian Era. This idea well Illustrates the subject. 54 OUE BIBLE CHKONOLOaY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. SECTION III. Objections to the foregoing account of the corrupt- ing of the Hebrew Chronology considered, in seven particulars. r Inasmuch, however, as the facts and arguments above adduced to fix upon the Jews and Samari- tans, ancient and modern, the responsibility of having, either from motives of national vanity or from a desire to prove that Christ was a p«eMC?o-Messiah, changed, corrupted, and mutila- ted the original Hebrew numbers, are denied by the advocates of the Septuagint version, before dismissing this part of the subject in hand it will be well to consider the objections raised against, them. It is urged — 1. That as the LXX translators "must have been men of high repute in the Church of Ood, and must have been intimately connected with the Sanhedrim^'' etc. ; therefore, they are innoxious to the charge of " having wilfully and systemat- ically altered and corrupted the chronology of their own Scriptures, from a motive of national vanity, and in order to raise the antiquity of their sacred records and of their nation." ' In reply to this, and without at all calling in question the " high repute," etc., of these seventy Jews, ei- ther iu an ecclesiastical or literary point of view, yet, from our historical description of the state of the nation, and of their surroundings at the time of their entering upon their labors,* we leave the candid reader to draw his own infer- ences, as to whether their Judaico-religious scru- pulosity was likely to place them beyond the reach of those influences which, as we contend, induced them to sacrifice scholastic fidelity to a spirit of national jealousy, in the execution of the task assigned them. Indeed, if we are war- ranted in measuring their piety by their com- mendation, according to Aristseus's account, of the "piety towards God" of the pagan king, Ptolemy Philadelphus, we are furnished with but a slen- der guarantee for their preservation of truth against expediency, in a conflict for pre-eminence of national origin. But, it is urged — 2. That, if the LXX translators and others, as set forth in the above theory, " were all guilty of corrupting the Scriptures at different and dis- tant periods, upon one and the same astronom- ical principle ;" inasmuch as " the difference be- tween the GheeJc and Hebrew Scriptures must have ■ Cunninghame's Chron. of Israel, Appendix, p. 101. ' See pp. 41-48 of this work. been known to multitudes, how," it is demand- ed, " are we to account for it that no one writer of antiquity was honest enough to bear witness to the fact?" In answer to this, it is quite suffi- cient to observe, in regard to the Jews of Alex- andria, that having, as already stated, lost a knowledge of the Hebrew language, so that they could neither read nor speak it, they were to- tally disqualified to detect the fraud. On the other hand, the ignorance of the Hebrew which everywhere prevailed among the Jews — the con- sequent diminution in the number of the Hebrew copies of Scripture — and, finally, the growing popularity of the Greek version, which " gradu- ally acquired the highest authority among the Jews of Palestine," etc., and which was used "throughout all the synagogues of the Roman empire," — are consideiations which will, we opine, abundantly account for the circumstance of si- lence by the ancients in this matter. Again : it is urged — 3. That not only " the whole Jewish Church before our Lord's appearance" had adopted the Greek version, but it was received and used by Christ and his Apostles during the JVew Testa- ment age. Therefore, it is argued that they, in so doing, on the above hypothesis, " must have connived at a wilful corruption of the Word of God." That there is great plausibility in this objection, no one can deny. It strikes home to the sensibilities of every pious heart. The intel- ligent Christian mind revolts at the thought of such " connivance." It is predicated of the sup- position, that " the Lord could not permit any falsification of his holy and revealed Word." ' Now, to this I reply — First. We know, that " as God has permitted all crimes of men," so he may have "permitted both designed and unintentional alterations in his Word, in respect to chronology and other subjects." That this is true of the Samaritan Pentateuch and of the Greek Septuagint, is placed beyond controversy. Equally certain is it that the same fact will apply to the falsification of the Hebrew version since the ninth century. The question, then, is— Did God permit these falsifi- cations of his word or not ? and if so, how can it be pretended that God was obliged to preserve the Hebrew text of the Old Testament uncor- rupted in its new translation by the LXX V This, however, is an important subject. With a view, therefore, to a vindication of our Lord > Soyffurth's Summary, etc., p. 119. ' lb. pp. 119, 120. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. and of his apostles from the cJiarge of a sinful "connivance," iu their adoption and use of the Greek version, with its falsifications of the true chronology, I remark — Second. That if we will consent for a moment to penetrate somewhat beneath the surface of the facts in the Ciise, we may discover that what would seem at first view to be a connivance at the corruption of God's word, is rather an illus- tration of that permissive administration of God's providence, which, " in times past, suffered all nations," and the Jews with others, "to walk in their own ways ;" ' while, at the same time, he so overruled their evil machinations as to make even " the wrath of man to praise him." " So in the case before us. Let us look at it. On the one hand, the chronology of the Greek version, which assigned the advent of Messiah to the sixth mil- lenary from the creation, had awakened a gen- eral expectation of his appearance about the time of his actual birth at Bethlehem. On the other hand, it is admitted by all Septuagintarians that copies of the Hebrew Scriptmes were in the possession of the Jews in the time of Christ. Whether, therefore, the " devout" Jews of Jeru- salem, who were anxiously expecting and " wait- ing for the Consolation of Israel," had consulted the Hebrew chronology or not, that chronology, historic and prophetic, pointed to the same event, and to its accomplishment at that time. If, then, we take the Septuagint computation for that event — reckoning the commencement of Daniel's seventy weeks from the destruction of the first temple, in the thirteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, B. c. 602 — it places it at a. m. 5586. If, on the other hand, we take the true Hebrew computa- tion — reckoning the commencement of the seventy weeks from the point fixed by the prophet, viz., "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem," which fell in the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimauus, b. c. 453 — it places it at a. m. 3679 ; making a difference between the two systems of nearly 2000 years. This leads to the remark — Third. That prophecy, in treating of the great mediatorial work of Messiah, speaks not only of the " sufferings of Christ," but also of " the glory that should follow." ' It hence contemplates two ADVENTS, with a prolonged period intervening. Turning back, then, to the diiference between these two chronological systems, while both equal- ly prepared the Jewish nation to expect Messiah's appearance about the same time — and when he came, if they would, to receive him, and to en- joy in its fulness all the blessings of the restored " first dominion" ' — it at the same time opened the door, in the event of their rejection of him, for the accomplishment of those ulterior purposes of God, predicted by Daniel, in reference to the cut- ting oflf of Messiah as a sin-atoning sacrifice," and of his " reception into the heavens until the times of restitution of all things:"' the interval of nearly 2000 years between the two events, be it borne in mind, being fully and minutely defined only in the chronology of the Hebrew Scriptures. See now — Fourth — what follows. It is evident that, as the Messiah who did come at the time indicated by the chronology of the Septuagint was rejected and murdered by the Jews, that system leaves them no ground of expectation that he ever will come. Hence the attempted correction of the chro- nology of the LXX by the Jews, the design being to make Christ appear to have been a false Mes- siah, who had come 1600 years before the time predicted by Habakkuk and others, — which, in the system of Aquila of Pontus, a. d. 11 9, was effected by shortening the lives of all the patriarchs before Abraham one hundred years. This system, how- ever, leaves the Jew without the indispensable provision and benefits of a sin-atoning Messiah. But the chronology, historic and prophetic, of the ORIGINAL Hebrew Scriptubes, provides against both these defects. It points the Jew to those statements of their own prophets, which, as I have said, set forth Messiah under the aspect of two advents; — one in his suffering humanity, which transpired more than 1800 years ago, but against which they shut their eyes and closed their hearts; the other, in his glorified nature, to be manifested at the end of the sixth millenary from the creation of the world. In conclusion, then, on this subject, I remark — Fifth. That if, in order to accomplish all the great ends contemplated in the work of Christ as Mediator, it was consistent with the infinite wis- dom and goodness of God, in the agencies em- ployed, that by the determinate counsel and fore- knowledge of God the Jews should first reject and then with wicked hands crucify and slay his Son; surely it was equally consistent with the permissive providence of Him who "knows the end from the beginning," that by the translation of the original Hebrew Scriptures into the Greek tongue, such a change in its chronology should « Acta xiv. 16. •■ Psalm Ixxvi. 10. ' 1 Pet. i. 10, 11. ' Mioah iv. 8. ' Daniel ix. 24^27. s Acts iii. 21. 56 OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY" CRITICALLY EXAMINED. have been effected as, in its bearings upon the TWO MANIFESTATIONS of the Messiah, should lead to the full accomplishment of the very things — '' the sufferings of Christ and the glory v?hich is to follow" — concerning which all the prophets had spoken, in connection with " the manner of time" set forth by them in the original Hebrew num- bers. On these grounds, therefore, we must insist that while there was no "connivance" on the part of our Lord or of his apostles at a wilful perversion of the original Scriptures, there was nevertheless a providential permission of the prev- alence and use, in the New Testament Church, of a version of Scripture which — though founded on a corrupt chronology, yet corresponding in all other respects with the Hebrew version — was over- ruled, in the then present state of the Church, to the accomplishment of the divine purposes in ref- erence to the two advents of Messiah, and the advancement of the interests of Christianity in the world. There is a difference between God's choosing evil that good may come — which he never has done nor can do — and his overruling a long-existing evil so as to turn it to the accom- plishment of his own most merciful and gracious designs. I add : it is urged — 4. That as there was an entire silence on the subject of the alleged corruptions of the Scriptures till in the fourth century, a. d. 378, when the Jews were charged by Ephrem, Cyrus, and others, with having corrupted their chronology, the natu- ral conclusion is, tliat in the apostolic age the dif- ference had no existence. My answer is, that the above charge pr^erred against the Jews had ref- erence, not to the alteration of the Hebrew text itself, but to TRANSLATIONS from the Hebrew into Hellenistic Greek ; of which, besides that of Aquila or Akiba, as above, there was the version of the Old Testament by Theodotion, an Ephesian, in A. D. 178, and of Symmachus, a. d. 193, who, as Epiphanius informs us, was a Jewish proselyte, and Jerome, that he was an Ebionite.' The origi- nal Hebrew itself had not yet been tampered with, the earliest modern chronicle being that of the Seder 01am Rabba, of the ninth century. Again : it is urged — 5. That " the earliest and most learned fathers of the Church unanimously declare that the true chronology of the Pentateuch was preserved in the Septuagint, but shortened by the Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem. Dr. Scyffarth, in sup- port of this statement, refers us to Origen, Justin ' Spanhoim's Eooles. Hist., pp. 188, 189. Martyr, Epiphanius, Eusebius, Jerome, Augus- tine, Julian of Toledo, Syncellus, etc., quoting more largely from Augustine on the subject than either of the others.' Our answer is, that while we admit the fact as it regards the fathers, we deny the inference — if the Hebrew be the shortened version referred to. It is certainly no marvel that " the earliest and most learned fathers of the Church should have held the Septuagint in high repute, when we consider that, imme- diately after the times of the apostles, the Hebrew Scriptures were in the exclusive custody of the unbelieving Jews, who were the bitterest enemies of the Christians, — leaving the Greek Churches no other version than that of the LXX till the time of Origen : and till the time of Jerome, the Latins had no other copy than a translation of it. True, there was an ancient Syriac version, made from the Hebrew, used in the East ; but the Hebrew itself was almost unknown, even to the learned, in the Christian Church. " The fathers," more- over, " with the exception of Origen and Jerome, were unacquainted with the Hebrew."' Origen commenced the study of it when quite advanced in life, and under all the disadvantages of those jealousies on the part of the Jews, in communi- cating a knowledge of it to the Christians, so peculiar to those times ; so that, as Prideaux tells us, "when Jerome got some of the Rabbis to help him in his Hebrew studies, it was only by bribing them with large sums, and then they would only come to him by night, for fear of their brethren." ' But what merits special observation in refer- ence to Dr. ScyffartE's authorities, as above, is his omission to append to his quotations from Augustine an account of the fact that, though once a Septuagintarian, yet, when he came to reflect on " the more easily supposable object with the Septuagint translators than with the keepers of the Hebrew, as well as better oppor- tunity for falsifying in the matter, in his four chapters on this subject (C D. xv. 10-14), he has put this point very strongly. Which, says he, is most credible — that the Jews, dispersed over all the world, should have conspired to- gether to defraud their Scriptures and themselves of truth, the exclusive possession of which is so much their boast ; or that the seventy Greek translators, united together in conclave by King Ptolemy, should have managed to falsify the nu- » Soyffarth's Summary, pp. 187-189. ' Home's lutrod., Fart I., chap. v. seo. 1. ' Cunninghame's Ohron. of Israel, Appendix, p. 101; Prid. Connec, Part II., B. iii. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 57 merals ? He adds (xiii. 2), as his own solution of the matter, that it was, after all, probably not the translators, but the first transcriber from the original in the royal library, that introduced the error — " Scriptoris tribuatur errori qui de Biblio- theck supradicti Regis codicem describendum pri- mus accepit ;" and concludes thus — " Ei lingue potius credatur unde est in aliam per interpretes facta translatio." It is to be recollected, how- ever, that Augustine puts this forth as merely conjectural. Jackson, a decided Septuagintarian, " allows that it is diflBcult to see the motives of the Jews in shortening the patriarchal genealo- gies. On the other hand, the Septuagint trans- lators had an obvious motive for enlarging the chronology. The Chaldeans and Egyptians (whose histories were about this time published by Berosus and Manetho) laid claim to a remote antiquity. Hence these translators of the Penta- teuch might have been led, in a spirit of rivalry, to augment the amount of the generations of their ancestors, alike by the centenary additions and by the interpolation (as Hales himself allows it is) of the second Cainan" " Augustine's testimony," however, taken as a whole, "is the more valuable and remarkable, because," as stated above, " he was himself origi- nally a Septuagintarian in chronology. At the conclusion of his C. D., however, he measures the six periods of the world preceding its septen- ary period, or Sabbath, by eras, not millenaries : the 1st to the flood ; 2d, to Abraham ; 3d, to David ; 4th, to the Babylonish captivity ; 5th, to Christ ; and 6th, to that after Christ." (C. D., xxii. 30, 5.) So much for this objection. It is once more urged — 6. That "«» the time of the seventy interpreters it was impossible, whereas after the destruction of Jerusalem it was possible, to propagate among the Jews a new biblical chronology"^ This objection to our theory rests on the supposition that the Jews of Alexandria, in the time of Ptolemy Phil- adelpus, were all possessed of and were familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures : and also that, be- tween that time and the advent of Christ, " mil- lions of Jews and Christians" were familiar with them ; while " after the destruction of Jerusalem there was not only no Sanhedrim, but nearly all manuscript copies of the Holy Scriptures had been burnt, and the remnant of the people who spoke Hebrew sold as slaves." But how far this statement accords with fact, may be gathered from the following. While, in regard to the ' Scyffarth's Summary, pp. 142, 143. former period, the Alexandrian Jews, as we have shown, could neither speak nor read the Hebrew — and which circumstance must have contributed largely to diminish the number of copyists — so, in reference to the intermediate period, it was the Greek Septuagint and not the Hebrew version that was in general use among the people. And as it respects the last period, Jewish tenacity for the preservation of their Scriptures, and the facilities available to the remnant who escaped the over- throw of their city for the multiplication of copies of them, must have soon made amends, commen- surate with their necessities, for any previous losses. Still, however, on the hypothesis of the cor- ruption of the original Hebrew by the seventy translators, it is demanded, " In what light would the king and his librarians view such a fraud ?" To this we reply by another demand. Did they know any thing about it ? If so, how ? Either themselves must have been good Hebraists, which we know they were not, or the LXX must have apprised them of it, which would have been to convict themselves, and incur thereby the brand of everlasting infamy. Equally at variance with common sense is the supposition, that as " all the seventy learned scribes of the Sanhedrim" in the time of Ptolemy took part in this translation, their successors in that body would be very ready to "reject" what had been the "inven- tion" of their predecessors. SECTION IV. The objections to the theory of the corruptions of the Hebrew Chronology herein advocated, as advanced by the writers of the modern Egyp- tological school. — :Mr. G. B. Gliddon's theory examined and refuted. But we now come to consider another and final objection to the theory herein advocated, and which, from its peculiar character, we shall consider under a distinct section. It is this : 1. Considering the almost numberless varia- tions, mutilations, etc., found in the Hebrew as well as in the Greek version, how, it is demand- ed, are we to determine the true from the false ? This is an important subject. Its relation to the question of chronology calls for a satisfactory re- ply. Conceding then the fact, as above, we must 58 OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. insist that the gordian knot must be, not cut, but untied. Numerous competitors for the honor of the last achievement have appeared on the stage within the last fifty years. Of these writeis, all, with the exception of Mr. Cullimorc, whose sys- tem in the main we have adopted, are or were, in the outset at least, of the Septuagintarian stamp. And, belonging as they do to the mod- ern Egyptological school, each occupies his own separate and distinct platform. " "While one class. Dr. ScyflFarth for example, claims to har- monize the chronology of the Septuagint with the planetary configurations of ancient Egypt; another, Mr. Gliddon for instance, though he at one time recognized the authority of the Septua- gint, yet now, as we shall see, discards it equally with that of the Hebrew version, and, in refer- ence to the subject of chronology, leaves us en- tirely at sea. We shall consider — I. The theory of Mb. George E. Gliddon. This gentleman, formerly U. S. Consul at Cairo, whom we now take the liberty to introduce to the special notice of the reader, made his hterary debut in a. d. 1843, in the form of a two-shilling pamphlet, under the imposing title following : "Ancient Egypt. Her Monuments, Hieroglyph- ics, History, and Archaeology, and other subjects connected with Hieroglyphical Literature." The same Mr. Gliddon turns up in a.d. 1857, in com- pany with "J. C. Nott, M. D., of Mobile, Alabama," as a candidate for new literary honors, in a pon- derous octavo of 7 3 8 pages, bearing the cogno- men, " Types of Mankind," etc. The reader having been duly notified by our redoubtable literary adventurer of the following, as the basis or stand-point of his speculations, namely, — that ^''inasmuch as Truth must neces- sarily harmonize with itself" therefore " if Archce- ology he a true science, the Scriptures will prove it to he so incontestably ; and if tlie Bihle he abso- lute truth, Archaeology will demonstrate the fact" ■ — we shall commence our animadversions on the theory of this writer by a reference to his sum- mary of facts in regard to the Hebrew version, as collected from Kennicott and G. Bernardo de Kossi, of Parma.' He says that Kennicott, . in his collation of Hebrew copies, made in 1780, having had access to no less than 692 manuscripts of the Hebrew text, of which 250 copies were collated by him- self, and the remainder by Mr. Burns under his direction, shows, that of the most ancient relics, but two were assigned by him to the tenth cen- 1 "Types of Mankind," pp. «20, 621. tury after Christ, while all the rest ranged be- tween the years a. d. 1200 and 1600. And also that, in the work of G. Bernardo de Rossi, the august Italian critic who resumed investigation into the actual condition of the Hebrew text at the point where his English predecessor had left off — recasting also the work of the illustrious Oxonian — he finds that, " of the manuscript Codices most ancient of the sacred text," .... the oldest, that of Vienna, dates a. d. 1019 ; the text, Reuchlin's of Carlsruhe, its age being a. d. 1038. And that there is " nothing in manuscript of the Hebrew Old Testament now extant of an earlier date than the tenth century after Christ." Then both the above collators are represented as exhibiting these various copies as " deficient, im- perfect, interpolated, full of errors," etc., etc., and especially in the department of chronology. In view, therefore, of the " horrible state of the Hebrew text" according to the collators, it is de- manded — " Is it not folly, then, to pretend to regulate history by a series of numbers thus tam- pered with, to say nothing of their scientific and historical impossibilities ?" " Folly 1" replies Mr. Gliddon — " it is worse than folly ; it is an absolute disregard of every principle of rectitude — an impudent mockery of educated reason — a perpetualized insult to honest understandings, and a perdurable derelic- tion, on the part of interested and self-conceited supernaturalists, of almighty Truth. Ignorance, abject ignorance, is the only plea through which future sustainers oi genesiacal numerals can escape from the charge of knavery. Let imbecility im- pale itself, henceforward, on either horn of this dilemma for the edification of the learned," etc' Yes, reader, and let me tell you that such low, coarse Billingsgate (with which this volume, by the way, everywhere abounds) is nothing more than might be expected from the progressive de- velopments of a theory, the first step in which, involving a repudiation of the original numeral verities of the Hehrew version, ultimates,'as I shall show, in that species of popular skepticism which, if it does not indeed reject it, aims to suhordinate, God's inspired Word to the proud and imperious claims of what we shall see anon to be " Science, falsely so called." But to proceed. This very astute, erudite, and indefatigable Mr. Gliddon, formerly United States Consul at Cairo, etc., in the character of an Egypto-hierologist, etc., comes forward in a. d, 1843 — for what? "to vindicate the early feme ' "Types of Mankind," p. 662. OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. 5t) of the Egyptians — to attest their wisdom, their power, and their boundless superiority to any of their contemporaries'" — the Hebrew race, of course, not excepted. But in order to reconcile the above pre-emi- nent Egyptian claims to antiquity with Scriptural times (" as it was," as Mr. G. tells us, " exceeding difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the monu- mental evidences of remote antiquity in Egypt — the pyramids, for instance — with the chronology of Archbishop Usher"'), he adopts the chronology of the Septuagint as fully adapted to his purpose, and which he then styled " the pure, uncorrupted Greek translation of the Old Testament."' Nor this only ; for, in regard to the other version, he tells us that, " for the period subsequent to Moses, the Hebrew text would seem to be more accurate than for anterior times," and that "from Moses downward. Archbishop Usher's system of chro- nology will probably be found best adapted to Jewish history."'' But again — mirabile dictu! — in the space of fourteen years, this Egypto-hierological devotee has imbibed such a passion for "science," that, by the aid of a certain Dr. Usher's '■'■geological and palwontological features of human history," and Dr. Geo. Morton's system of "'■Ethnology!'' lie is induced to join himsfclf to the " Cis-Atlantic school of Anthropology."" More than this — by the light reflected on his mind through the aid of the '■'■ archmologicaV and "" paleographic'" antiqui- ties of Egypt, like a giant refreshed with new wine, he steps forth under cover of a ponder- ous octavo, and boldly proclaims, that as "the physical history of mankind has been trammelled for ages by arbitrary systems of chronology, more especially by that of the Hebrews,'" etc., and as " it is now generally conceded" (which assertion, by the way, is utterly false) "that there exists no data by which we can approximate the date of man's first appearance upon earth;" and as, " for aught we know, it may be thousands or millions of years beyond our reach ;" and as " the spurious systems of Archbishop Usher on the Sebrew text, and of Dr. Halesh on the Septua- girit" (the italics are ours), are "entirely broken down ;" — therefore he turns, "unshackled by pre- judice, to the monumental records of Egypt as his best guide." Yes : " To Egyptology, beyond all question," he proclaims, "belongs the honor » "-Ancient Egypt," p. 84. In the above quotation, the Ualiea are Mr. Gliddon's. » lb. p. 85. ' lb. p. 38. ' lb. p. 61. » "Types of Mankind," preface, pp. ix. x. » lb. p. 59. of dissipating those chronological fables of past generations, continued belief in which, since the publication of Chevalier Lipsius's researches, im- plies simply the credulity of ignorance;'" and hence, "with the derisive jeers of men of science," as the choicest boon he has to bestow upon poor ignorant and deluded evangelical " theologicals," he is "now endeavoring to reconstruct a solid chronology out of the debris of universal and primeval humanity yet traceable, in their vari- ous centres of creation, upon our planet's super- ficies!"" Thus equipped, this ardent adventurer for new literary laurels sets out, under the passport of a "logically orthodox axiom," borrowed from "Vater" — to wit, "Faith in Christ can set no limits to critical inquiries ; otherwise he would hinder the knowledge of truth."* This, by his protsean touch, is converted into a mask behind which he professes to follow the apostolic admonition, " Search the Scriptures." Having, moreover, told us, as above, that we "have no data by which we can approximate the date of man's first appear- ance upon earth," or determine whether it be " thousands or millions of years ;" in a word, hav- ing informed us that " the real question" concern- ing the important matter at issue, " when posited in logical shape,'' is the following — " The Hebrew Moses wrote the Hebrew Pentateuch. Did the Hebrew Moses write the Hebrew Pentateuch ? If the Hebrew Moses wrote the Hebrew Pentateuch, where is the Hebrew Pentateuch Moses wrote ?" — and thereby, with a refinement of infidel efi'ron- tery, compared with which we know of no par- allel, he ignored the authenticity of the Penta- teuch, claimed by all Christendom to have been written by Moses : — I repeat, thus equipped, Mr. Gliddon commences the execution of that portion of the ponderous tome now before us which had been assigned to him (but which, after all, is nothing more, substantially, than what is found in his twenty-five cent pamphlet of 1843, newly vamped), with a series of articles which, from a regard to logical precision, we shall classify agree- ably to the following order — namely: 1st. "A palseographic excursus on the art of writing, . . . from the earliest antiquity to the present day ;"* 2d. An " archaeological introduction to the tenth chapter of Genesis;'" 3d. An "analysis of the Hebrew nomenclature," as contained in the tenth chapter of Genesis;' 4th. "The tenth chapter of 1 " Types of Mankind," pp. 59, 60. ' lb. p. 662. s lb. Part III., p. 575. * lb. pp. 628-654. » lb. 678-628. • lb. pp. 466-568. 60 OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Genesis modernized in its nomenclature, to dis- play, popularly and in modern English, the mean- ing of its ancient writer;'" and, 5th. An addi- tional section on the " antiquity of the name of ADAM," etc. ;' — in reference to one and all of which, he tells us that " it would be unphilosophi- cal to set forth with any theory as to age, author- ship, or true place of this document, in the arrange- ment of the canonical books." ' And now, reader, having plodded through 187 pages of the "Types," etc., in closely cramped Nonpareil, what think you are the conclusions to which we are conducted? Why, 1st. That the square letter of the Hebrew is the fifth in the order of succession from the ancient Hemitic or Egyptian hieroglyphics; 2d. That having repu- diated the Hebrew and Greek versions of the Scriptures, and with them the received English version of King James, which was translated fiom them, as worthless, said Mr. Gliddon sets up a demand for a 7iew translation ; 3d. That with such a new translation we are now provided, and that at the hand of this master Hebraist and critic in general, the said Mr. Geo. R. Gliddon, which may be found in the 3d, 4th, and 5th arti- cles above ; wherein we are told — First. That, "viewed by itself as a document from all others distinct, incorporated by the Es- draic school into the canonical Hebrew writings, the tenth chapter of Genesis is simply an Ethnic chorograph" (or heathen geographical sum- mary), "wherein the three 'types of mankind'" (Greek, Egyptian, and Syriac),* " generically clas- sified as red, yellow, and white, are mapped out after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, in their nations," etc' Second. That "as no 'type of mankind' but the white race can be said (physiologically) to hlush, it follows that, according to the conception of the writers of Genesis (who were Jews, and of the white race), not only did the first human pair converse between themselves, no less than with God and with the serpent, in pure Hebrew, but they were essentially A-DAM-ites {red man and woman), 'blushers;' and therefore these Hebrew writers never supposed that ADaM and ISE {yulgarice, Adam and Eve) could have been of any stock than of the white type — in short, He- brews, AbrahamidoB — like themselves, these writ- ers aforesaid." Ergo, as the square letter of the ancient Hebrew had no existence till subsequent 1 "Types of Mankind," pp. 658, 554. » lb. pp. 572-57i. a lb. p. 468. • lb. p. 650. » lb. pp. 554, 555. to that of the Assyro-Phoenician, b. c. 700,' so " among Hebraists of the highest modern school on the European continent, the fact that 'Adam' is a dissyllabic name, alone suffices to prove that its possessor appeared on earth thousands of YEARS SUBSEQUENTLY TO THE PRIMORDIAL ASES OF HUMANITY, because in principio man articu- lated but monosyllables !" etc." And, Third. That in reference to the Pauline state- ment, "And [Go.d] hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the appointed times and the bounds of their habitation,"' and which Mr. Gliddon styles "a remarkable text," he affirms it to be the only one in the New Testament which alludes directly to the dogma of '■'unity of races." Also, that "inasmuch as it has no parallel," and as the inspired St. Paul's "knowledge of nations and of races did not extend beyond that of his hearers," therefore the expression uttered by him when he stood upon Mars' Hill and preached to the men of Athens, " hath made of one blood all nations of men" was certainly meant to apply only to those nations about which he was in- formed — that is, merely the Roman empire!*' Thus, then, is it that this newly-fledged would- be philosopher, Biblio-philological critic, translator, and commentator of holy Scripture, and the for- midable champion of Egypto-Ethnologieal science, under an imposing array of authorities — Jewish, Gentile, Christian, Turk, and infidel-^seeks to bewilder, confound, and entrap the unwary into a substitution, as a guide to truth, of the light emanating from the " Cis- Atlantic school of an- thropology" of Dr. Morton, in the plan of what he (as the author, Mr. G. R. G., avows of himself), from "eailiest childhood, has been assured," — viz., "That the Bible is the word of God, and that the inspiration of the writings of the Old Testament rests upon testimony the most irrefra- gable."" It does not, as the reader will readily perceive, fall within our province in these pages to review at large the "Types of Mankind;" nor, as we shall see, is it at all necessary that we should do so. Both parts of that work lead to tlje same results — that of elevating the antiquities of the nation, literature, religion, etc., of the Egyp- tians above all others, that of the Hebrew race and their ancestors not excepted, — and all with ' See tables of " the order of development of human writings," " Types of Mankind," pp. 680, 681. » lb. pp. 572, 578. s Acts xvii. 20. ♦ lb. pp. 658, 559. » lb. p. 675. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 61 a view to prove, tliroiigli the developments of the modern mushroom ethnological process, that Adam "appeared on earth thousands of years subsequently to the primordial ages of human- it)'," and hence, \>y sequence, that the records of the Hebrew, Gre'k, and English versions of holy Scripture are me;e '■'■myths" or, i/true, that "the horrible state of the text" precludes " the possi- bility of regulating history by a series of numbers which have been so tampered with." With such results, therefore, as these and the like before us, we feel ourselves bound by a sense of present moral obligation and of future responsibility which we cannot evade, to arrest, so far as lieth in us, those modern infidel tendencies with which these last "perilous times" everywhere abound. We would — suu^m cuigue trihuto — give to every one his due. Yet what can we think of an author who is so ignorant of history as to make that great Jewish system of chronol- ogy, the " Seder 01am Rabba" of the year a. d. 832, to have originated in a.d. 130,' — thereby robbing Aquila or Akiba, of a. d. 119, of his rightful honor of having first, under a Hellen- istic translation, corrupted the Hebrew numbers ; — who is so deficient in his acquaintance with the New Testament, as we shall see anon, as to affirm that Acts xvii. 26 is the "only" passage " which alludes directly to the dogma of unity of races ;" — aye, and more than this, who, out of blind subserviency to an idolized theory, has the effrontery to charge upon the inspired Apostle Paul such ignorance of the subject on which he was addressing "the men of Athens on Mar's Hill," as not to know the difference between the subjects of the ^^ Hainan empire" and the "all nations that dwell upon the earth," etc. ; — and, finally, who tells us, in his twenty-five-cent pam- phlet of A. D. 1843, that "it is satisfactory to be able to prove that there is nothing required by Egyptian antiquities that can affect the truth of Scripture, or that is so boundless as to subvert the text of the Bible ?" " So also, in a. d. 1857, his new discoveries and wonderful progress in ethno- logical science lead him to aflBrm that " the spu- rious systems of Archbishop TJsher on the He- brew text, and of Dr. Hales on the Septuagint, are "entirely broken down," and that to "eth- nology," alias " anthropdogy," " beyond all ques- tion, belongs the honor of dissipating those chro- nological fables of past generations, continued belief in which, since the publication of Chevalier Lipsius's researches, implies simply the credulity » " Aneiont Egypt," etc., p. 84. ' lb. p. 86. of ignorance,'' etc. Now, we deferentially sub- mit, whether such an author is entitled to claim at our hands an unconditional surrender of a faith regarding which the maxim of Vincent of Lerius, " Quod ubique, quod sernper, quod ab om- nibus creditum est" — that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all — will at least ap- ply, and adopt in its place a science (I here quote from Dr. J. C. Nott) " born, we may say, in our own generation," ' and which boasts that, " through a few cuts of an archaeological scal- pel,"" it demolishes and scatters to the four winds of heaven the "genesiacal" records, and with them " the spurious systems of Archbishop Usher on the Hebrew, and of Dr. Hales on the Septua- gint ;" and to believe that the said science of ethnology has "reconstructed a solid chronology out of the debris of universal and primeval hu- manity (alias anthropology, alias the pre-Adam- iTEs), yet traceable, in their various centres of creation, upon our planet's superfices !" But, as this is a subject little studied and less understood, it may not be out of place here sim- ply to state, that this very imposing system of ethnography alias anthropology is nothing more nor less than that of Isaac de la Peyrera, who, in A. D. 1655, unable to reconcile the exorbitant claims of antiquity of the ancient Chaldeans, Egyptians, Hindoos, etc , with that given to the first human pair by Moses, affirmed that Adam and Eve could not have been the first progenitors of the human race. Hence his pre-Adamite the- ory ; and which, in its original form, has found an advocate in our day in the person of Rev. Dr. Edward Beecher of Boston.' True, in the hands ■of our modern philosophers, Messrs. Nott and Gliddon, it is put forth under a new and more fascinating guise. But, substantially, it is the same with the above pre-Adamite theory. Now, that Mr. George R. Gliddon & Co. are taxing our credulity at the expense of all honor, consistency, and truth, I shall proceed to demon- strate — himself and Co. being judges. Take, in illustr?ition, Mr. G. R. G.'s stand-point in these premises : " Inasmuch as truth must necessarily harmonize with itself," therefore, " if archaeology be a true science, the Scriptures will prove it to be so incontestably ; and if the Bible be absolute truth, archaeology will demonstrate the fact." Now take Mr. Gliddon's dogmatic statement regarding Acts xvii. 26, that it "has no paral- 1 " Types of Mankind," introd., p. 50. ° lb. p. 578. 3 See Beeohcr's " Conflict of Nations," etc. 62 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. lei," and that it is "tlie only" passage in the New Testament which alludes directly to the dogma of unity of races." — First, it " has no parallel." On this point let the reader turn to Gen. i. 26-28, and he will read, " So God created man in his own image . . . male and female . . . and God blessed them, and said unto them. Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" etc. And then let him turn to chap. iii. 20, and he will read, " And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living!'' Finally, let him turn to chap. ix. 19 : speaking of the peopling of "the world" by the descendants of Noah's three sons, Japheth, Shem, and Ham, it says. '■^And of them the whole earth was overspread" Then, second — If he wishes for a refutation of the statement that Acts xvii. 26 is "the only" passage in the New Testament which directly alludes to the dogma of unity of races," let me remind him, in the first place, of our blessed Lord's direct reference to the Mosaic account of the creation of man as given in Gen. i. 26-28, and ii. 7, when he said (Mark x. 6), " And from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female ;" the proof that he referred direct to Adam and Eve being given in the fol- lowing verse, the seventh, where he quotes the very words of Moses, " Therefore shall a man leave 'his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife," etc. And, if the reader desires additional proof, let me refer him to St. Paul (1 Cor. XV. 45, 47), where he twice expressly de- clares that Adam was "the first man." What man, then, I respectfully ask, whether learned or unlearned, is willing to risk his repu- tation or his title to the possession of common sense, by an indorsement of Mr. George R. Glid- don's exposition of Acts xvii. 26 ? No ; that passage, in defiance of his sophistical quibblings, tortuous reasonings, and monstrous conclusions, stands out upon the page of inspiration in bold relief, at once as a stereotyped and irrefragable refutation of ethnological science, and a scathing reproof to the bold and unscrupulous theorist, who, to gain a point, dares to detract from the universally admitted general scholarship of the great pupil of Gamaliel, and to impugn the in- spiration of the greater Apostle of Christ — St. Paul! To conclude, therefore, this unavoidably length- ened notice of the " science, falsely so called," of ethnology, as advocated by Mr. George R. Glid- don & Co., and to return to the objection at the head of this article. First : Having proved, as above, that the Scrip- tures most irrefragably demonstrate the fallacy of ethnological science in regard to the question of " the unity of races ;" therefore, on the principle that "truth must necessarily harmonize with it- self," the entire " anthropological " theory of Messrs. Nott & Gliddon^reared at such an im- mense outlay of toil and treasure, and invest- ed with so much of artistic display (embracing, as it does, no less than 362 wood-cuts and litho- graphic prints, etc., and making up quite a tempt- ing picture-book for overgrown as well as smaller children) — topples and falls to the ground, like Dagon before the ark. I observe in the next place — Second : That the science of ethnography be- ing proved fallacious, it follows that the Scrip- tures of the Old and New Testaments, in all their various versions — Hebrew, Greek, and English, whether ancient or modern — take their original place as the fountain of primordial antediluvian and postdiluvian hi^sto^y and chronology. And, finally, I remark — Third : That— the " horrible state of the Hebrew text" to the contrary notwithstanding, and even admitting that it is much greater than repre- sented — the very criterion adopted in this work as demonstrative of the growing corruptions of the Hebrew text through a long series of ages. Judaic and Christian, when applied to existing versions, will at once decide between the true and the false, by pointing us to that version not only, but to the copy of that version whose chro- nological numbers harmonize therewith. . That version we claim to be the Hebrew, the chronology of which, as critically examined and adjusted in this work, is the same with that adopted by the forty-seven English translators in. our present version (a. d. 1003), called "King James's Bible.'' SECTION V. An examination of the claims of the ancient pro- fane historians, for a vastly greater antiquity for the origin of man, etc., than that given in the sacred writings. But, even admitting that we have satisfactorily disposed of the question as to an authoritative version in determining the true chronology of Scripture, the greatest care and circumspection OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 63 in arranging, classifying, and harmonizing its de- tails are indispensable not only, but we are com- pelled, so to speak, to contend for the ground we occupy, inch by inch, against a host of rival the- ories of the Egyptological school. Before entering, however, on the main subject in hand, it will be well to premise that — even in view of the most expanded date of the Septua- gint, from the creation to the present time, viz., 7629 years — the ancient profane writers in their Cabalas claim a vastly greater antiquity for the origin of man and of nations than that given in the sacred writings. For example : In the Old Egyptian Chronicle, after assigning an eternity to Hephaestus (Vulcan — Pthah) the creator, it appropriates to the reign of Helius (the sun), son of Hephaestus, during the antediluvian age, three myriads, or 30,000 years ; and Chronus, with the other twelve divinities, 3984 years. Of the demigods — or MkstrjEans — of the post- diluvian age, 217 years; while it assigns to the Egyptians as men, from the first to the thirtieth dynasty inclusive, 2541 years, which, with the other, gives to the whole period a total of 36,525 years. On the other hand, the pretensions of the Chinese, Indians, Persians, Etruscans, etc., carry us back to a period thou- sands of years anterior to the remotest era of Egyptian history. Still, they were more modest in their claims than the Chaldeans, who, when Alexander the Great visited Asia, were found to have reckoned 470,000 years since they began to count the stars ! Happily, however, the fallacy of these and the like extravagant pretensions can be made to ap- pear, by a simple comparison of the facts of his- tory, sacred and profane, as based on their internal evidence. If, for example, we can de- monstrate that there is an exact correspondence or identity of persons, places, etc., in both, it will show that the above ancient Cabalas must have been founded on the traditionary legends which they derived from the Hebrews ; and hence, that their alleged remoter antiquity is fabulous. Let us see. First — Of the ancient Egtptian records. The Menes of Diodorus and other heathen writers (the Timaus of Plato, and the Mestraim of Herodotus, Erastosthenes, etc., all different names of the same person) is claimed by the Egyptians as their first king, who, they say, after his first settling in Egypt, penetrated further into the interior, and built Thebes and Memphis. Now, that this king is identical with the Mizraim of Moses, and a son of Ham, whose posterity settled Egypt, is evi- dent from the fact, first, of its near resemblance to one of the three names above — Mestraim. Besides, Canaan was settled before Egypt, the Hebron of the former country, situated between Shinar and Egypt, being built before Zoan in the latter. Moses' testimony is explicit on this point : " Now Hebron was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt." ' In addition to the above, it is clear from the united testimony of Plutarch, Philo-Biblius, and Porphyry, that the Egyptians, at the first, were worshippers of the One True God. This exactly coincides with the Mosaic account of Abraham's reception and entertainment in Egypt, the same as at Gerar^ which could not have been had they then been idolaters. This event — which was coincident with the reign of the Shepherd Kings, who at that time governed Egypt, but who were detested by the Egyptians who had fallen into idolatry before the time of Joseph — accounts for Abraham's kind reception by them as a shep- herd ; while, at a subsequent period, Joseph's brethren, because they were shepherds, were by them held in abhorrence.' At length Menes or Mestraim, alias the Mizraim of Moses, was deified, and worshipped as a god. Again — The Egyptian king Sliishak, and also Tharaka or Tirhaka, who made war against Sen- nacherib, king of Assyria — together with Pha- raoh Necho, who waged a warfare against both the Assyrians and Jews — and Pheron, or Rameses Tubaete, the successor of Sesostris, and whose dreams were interpreted by Joseph — all occupy their places in our Scriptures. Finally, on this subject — Thebes, or Theba, a name signifying the ark, the metropolis of ancient Egypt, is referred to in our Scriptures under the name of " No-Ammon," " Populous No," and was most probably derived from Noah. The whole valley of the Nile was not large enough to contain it. Its chief temple, that of " KarnakJ'' seems to have been built in commemoration of the deluge. But, what is of principal interest to us in regard to this temple is, that among the numerous hieroglyphical in- scriptions upon its walls, are to be found inscribed the history of one event connected with the Hebrew race, which is most fully and graphically set forth by the pen of the great Jewish lawgiver. I refer to the bondage of the children of Israel, in 1 Numb. xiii. 22. » Compare Gen. xii. 14, with xx. 1, 2, etc. a See on this, Soyffarth's assertion, that the Hebrews were the Hyfeshoa or Shepherd Kings who reigned in Egypt. 64 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXA.MINED. Egypt. This is confirmed by a tablet represent- ing them on the tomb of Rekshare, who is known to have been the chief architect of the temples and palaces at Thebes, under Pharaoh Moeris. This tablet depicts the exact physiognomy of the Jews, with their bodies besmeared from the splashes of the clay of which they made their brick, while the hand of the taskmaster is ready to inflict the heavy baton on some worn-ont la- borer, — illustrating our scriptural phrase regarding them, " all their service that they made them to serve withal, was with rigor." ' It also informs us that these Hebrews were "captives brought by his majesty to build the temples of the Great God," doubtless referring to their being marched up from Goshen for this purpose ; which corre- sponds with the narrative of Moses, that they were compelled to build " for Pharaoh treasure-cities, Pithom and Raamses." ' Second — In the Belus of ancient history, who is supposed to have been' the founder of the Ancient Assyrian Empire, and of which Babylon was the capitol, we find the Nimrod of the Scrip- tures, the grandson of Ham the son of Noah, " the beginning of whose kingdom," says Moses, " was Babel (Gr. Babylon), in the land of Shihar."' But in addition to the above, to show the absur- dity of the extravagance of Diodorus and others — who, in after ages, represent the armies of Semir- amus and her buildings at Babylon to be more nu- merous and magnificent than can be conceived by any who considers the infant state kingdoms were in when she reigned — I have only to men- tion the fact as recorded by Moses, of the over- throw of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam — Tidal, king of nations — Amraphel, king of Shinar — and Arioch, king of Elassar, by Abraham, for the capture of his nephew Lot, with no other force than his 318 armed servants!* And so, when we come down to a still later period in the annals of heathen writers in this connection, we find a similar coincidence in the facts recorded. Of the three kingdoms into which the ancient Assyrian empire was divided upon the death of Sardanapalus — viz., Nineveh, Baby- lon, and the kingdom of the Medes — Nineveh had for its first king Tiglath-Pileser." His name occurs in our Scriptures in connection with Syria, at first settled by the posterity of Shem, the youngest son of Noah. Of the kings of this country but little is known, till the time of Alex- ander the Great, except what is related of them in our sacred writings. Of one of them, Hada- ' Exod. i. 18, 14. » Gon. xiv. 12-16. "Ib.i. 11. 'Gen.x. 9, 10. ' 2 Kings xvi. 7. dezer, we read that he made war, but unsuccess- fully, against King David.' Another, Benhadad, was three times defeated by Ahab and Ahaziah." Little more is related of the Assyrian kings, till Syria was made a province of the Assyrian em- pire by Tiglath-Pileser, who defeated and slew Rezin, its king, in battle.' Tiglath-Pileser was followed by Salmaneser, who carried captive into Assyria the ten tribes of Israel : * by Sennacherib, who, with his army of 180,000 men, was destroyed for blaspheming the God of Israel :' by Esarhaddon, who subdued Babylon and annexed it to his dominions :' by Nebuchadnezzar, who invaded Judea, and car- ried the Hebrews captive to Babylon : ' by Bel- shazzar — the same with the Assyrian Labynit — who was conquered by the Persian monarch Cyaxares II., or " Darius the Mede," of our Scrip- tures,' in conjunction with Cyrus, who subse- quently restored the Hebrews to their own land from the Babylonish captivity.' But, to return now to the remoter ages of antiquity. Third — Of the Indian Bacchus, whom they say was twice born, and that he was the first who pressed the grape and made wine, etc., we find an exact resemblance in Noah, whose preserva- tion in the ark during the universal flood made him, so to speak, as one twice born ; and who, Moses says, " began to be a husbandman, and planted a vineyard, and drank of the wine," etc.'" And so. Fourth — Of the Chinese annals, which are next in order, as the most ancient of the nations. They claim Fohi as their first emperor. Their traditions regarding him are, that his mother was surrounded with a rainbow at the time of his conception ; and, that he sacrificed seven sorts of creatures to the Supreme Spirit of heaven and earth : both of which facts coincide with the "rainbow," etc., of the Noahic Covenant," and with the clean beasts and fowls which Noah of- fered by sevens in sacrifice to God, on leaving the ark after the subsiding of the flood.'" The same will be found to hold equally true, Fifth — Of the Greeks, who account that Chro- nos, their first king, was the second father of mankind, which circumstance makes him iden- tical with the Noah of the Old Testament. Finally — ' 2 Sam. viii. — x. ' 1 Kings xx. » 2 Kings xvi. 9. * 2 lb. xvii. 8. » 2 lb. xviii. « 2 lb. xix. 87. ' 2 lb. xxiv. 1. » Comp. Isa. xliv. 28, 45, with 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22 j Ezra i. 1-7 ; V. 18, etc. « 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 23. '» Gon. ix. 20, 21. " lb. ix. 11-15. " lb. vii. viii. QUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 65 Sixth — A few miscellaneous facts will close this evidence. Of the ancient Phoenicians, Herod- dotus claims for the older Tyre — the principal cities of which were Sidon and Tyre — a great antiquity. Now, of the kings of Sidon we know but little. But we know that Hiram, king of Tyre, was contemporary with David and Solomon," two of the mightiest Hebrew monarchs. Again — In profane history, Pul, one of the last sovereigns of Assyria, and who, as king of Nineveh, subdued Israel in the reign of Mena- hem, is the Pol of the Hebrew Scriptures, who, with his people, repented at the preaching of the prophet Jonah.' So, also, the Camhyses of Persia, who added Egypt to his empire, is the same with the Artor xerxes of the Hebrew records.' And, finally, the city of Cadytus, mentioned by Herodotus, is identical with the Holy City OF Jerusalem. With these facts before us, it becomes a matter of grave inquiry to ascertain in what way so pro- digious, extensive, and apparently plausible a fraud was brought about. It may be traced, if I mis- take not, to the national pride of the ancient Egyptians, as one of the oldest among the an- tique nations ; which, taken in connection with their indulgence in a romantic humor for magni- fying the traditionary facts with which they were familiar, by a very natural consequence, led them to claim a priority of origin over all others. Hence the circumstance of the longevity of the ancient Hebrew patriarchs — whose ages, according to that version, varied from 365 to 969 years — led to the extravagances exhibited in the old Egyp- tian chronographeon above ; and also led them, as in the account given by Berosus of the age of the postdiluvian kings, to compute those of Chal- dea by a sarus, each of which was equal to 603 years, — thus making them to have lived, some 10, 12, 13, and 18 sari, the last of which life amounted to 10,854 years! And so, the same propensity.existing among other heathen nations, the extravagance increased as time rolled on. In confirmation of this statement it will be suf- ficient to observe, that the most ancient Egyptian records, which bear the impress of a rigid perspi- cuity of style, left accounts easily reconcilable with the facts with which the history of Moses abounds, in regard to the early postdiluvian age. > 2 Sam. V. 11; 1 Kings v. 1. " Compare 2 Kings xv. 19, with Jonali iv. 11. = Ezra iv. 7 ; Neh. ii. 1 ; v. 14. 9 The following paraphrase of a passage from San- choniathon of Berytus, by Philo-Biblius, will be found in point : " When Satumus" (or the Mizraim of the Scriptures) " went to tlie South" (or removed from the lower Egypt into Thebais), "he made Taautus king of all Egypt ; and the Cabiri" (who were the sons of Mizraim) " made memoirs of these transactions." ' In this way it is easy to account for the much closer resemblance and aflSnity between the tra- ditionary facts of the earlier, compared with those of the later Egyptian and other heathen writers in these premises. For example : The identity of the Menes of the Egyptians with the Mizraim — of the Belus of the Assyrians with the NiMROD — and of the Indian Bacchus, the Chinese Fohi, and the Greek C'hronos, with the Noah of the sacred Hebrew records, all seem perfectly easy and natural. But, on the other hand, as you glide onward down the stream of time, this transition becomes forced and unnatural. Take, in illustration, the history of the Egyptian dynasty. First in order follows the account of their gods, then of their demigods and heroes, and finally of their kings, Now, to account for their perversion of the unso- phisticated facts of primitive sacred history, we have only to bear in mind a circumstance famil- iar to every scholar of antiquity, that, at a very early period of their existence, to their heroes the Egyptians appended the names of their side- real and mundane deities, the theologico-philo- sophical opinions concerning whom, in their sub- sequent mythological accounts, were transferred to the lives and actions of the heroes themselves. This delusion, growing and strengthening with that nation's love of the marvellous, at length became incorporated with their entire mytho- logical system. It is, however, susceptible of the clearest demonstration, that the chronology of the succession assigned in authentic history to the sovereigns of the four kingdoms into which an- cient Egypt was divided — viz., Thebes, Thin or This, Memphis, and Tanais — and the events nar- rated between the times of Menes, the founder of Egypt, and the overthrow of the army of Rameses I. in the Red Sea, so nearly coincides with the period between the time of Menei or Mizraim and it, as to prove beyond a doubt the harmony of the events of profane with those of the Mosaic records. ' See Sliuoliford's Connections, vol. i. p. 13. 66 OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. SECTION VI. The alleged chronology of ancient Egyptian mon- umental remains^ compared with that of the Hebrew Scriptures. — Mr. G. R. Gliddon. With sucli evidence before us, therefore, of the fictitious character of the chrouology of the ancient pagan Cabalas, and ascribing it rather to the vagaries of a misguided imagination than to dishonesty of purpose ; we now turn to the ground, as chronologically occupied by the advocates of the Septuagint version, placed in contrast with that of the authorized Hebrew numbers, in order that we may determine which of the two is en- titled to our acceptance. Take, in illustration, the dates of the Deluge, the Call of Abraham, and the Exode, as given in the following Table : — HEBEEW. SEPT, Em Events. A. M. B. C. A. M. B. 0. 1656 20S3 2518 2470 2049 1619 2425 80ST 85TS 4003 8445 (Menes, first Egyptian King.) Deluge to Call of Abraham 2788 2297 Call to Exod& 1867 It being conceded, then, that the difference exhibited in the dates of these two columns could only have originated in design, we obtain, I submit, a clue to the secret of the hostility of the modern Egyptologists to the chronology of the Hebrew version. Under cover of a defence of the seventy Greek translators, against the charge preferred by us — of having changed and mutilated the original Hebrew numbers from motives of national vanity — the object of these writers is, to wrest from the Jew the prophetic assurances of the national restoration and pre-eminence among the nations of his long down-trodden race, and to rob him of his ardently cherished hope of the coming of his Messiah, That this is not mere conjecture, will be made evident anon. True, in reaching these results, various schemes are de- vised ; — one class, Mr. George R. Gliddon for ex- ample, employing, as a pretext for the rejection of the shorter numbers of the Hebrew text, the alleged antiquity of the monuments of Egypt; and Dr. Scyffarth, the alleged coincidence be- tween the infallible accuracy, even to a day, of the chronology of the Septuagint, and the math- ematically certain system of the planetary con- figurations of the four great world-ages of the ancients. Compared with the Hebrew numbers, which in the above Table give between the deluge and Call 427 years, and between the Call and exode 430 yeare — total, SST years ; the Septuagint claims for the first period 662 years, and for the second 916 years — total, 1578 years. If, then, we adopt the above Septuagint numbers as a medium (for no two of its advocates have ever been known to unite in the same dates on any one period), they overreach those of the Hebrew between the deluge and the exode by 721 years. Let us then apply this difference — I. To THE ALLEGED MONUMENTAL REMAINS OP ANCIENT Egtpt. — On this subject, our very learn- ed ethnologico-Egyptologist, Mr. George R. Glid- don, says : " Turn to Archbishop Usher's chro- nology, and take note, that between Mizraim and Abraham we have to condense all the events into a space not exceeding 200 years, when there could not have been 100,000 inhabitants on all the earth, according to any reasonable statistical calculation ; whereas, if Abraham's birth be placed at more than 1000 years after the flood, a period has been allowed for the propagation of man- kind, which at least is more reasonable, no less than more orthodox." Then, having stated that " it is sufficient for him to acknowledge Ham and Mizraim to be the progenitors of the Egyptians," he adds : " On the epoch of the latter's [i. e. Miz- raim's] immigration, / have not the presumption to decide. It is enough that it took effect at an adequate lapse of time after the deluge; and yet sufficiently remote from Menes, the first Pharaoh of Egypt, to admit all relative preparatory events ; and as, on Egypt, the Bible is silent for many centuries, we may legitimately look to other sources for information." ' Again : from " the traditionary legends float- ing in the works of Greek writers on Egypt, in- ferences gleaned from the mythological doctrines that wrap truth in the garb of fable, and deduc- tions legitimately drawn from the monuments," we are, he says, " enabled to consider it probable that a piiestly aristocracy was the first form of government in Egypt ; created gradually, out of the union of those patriarchal heads of villages, who probably governed," etc. ; and then having, a few lines further on, exchanged probability for certainty, he adds, " A hibbarohy appears to have been the first form of general government adopted by the Egyptians of that primeval period ; which we feel persuaded preceded the establishment of a monarchy. This hierarchy we presume to have > Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 44. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED 67 commenced within a few generations of Miz- "raim's immediate descendants ; to have increased in power until the accession of Menes, the first Pharaoh ; and to have ruled Egypt during the conjectural period of about 400 years." ' Further : from Mizraim and Menes, as above, we pass to Mr. Gliddon's account of the Egyptian pyramids, of which there are at Memphis about 25, and at the Southard, and in other parts, maay more; while in Ethiopia there are 139. The pyramids of Ghizeh are of all sizes, from the largest to the smallest. The largest, that of Shoopho (king), is — Ft, height Sq. ft., hase. Cab. ft. mftsonry. Tons weight 450.9 746 83,028,000 6,848,000 The smallest of the nine at Ghizeh is some TO feet high, with a square base of about 102 feet. Those of Ethiopia are — [Square Base.] Maxim. Minim. 80 Pyramids at Meroe, — Sandstone 60 ft 20 ft. 42 " atNoori, " 100 " 20 " IT » at Gebel-BiAel, '• 88" 28 " » Mr. Gliddon then adds, of these pyramids : " It is recorded that it took 30 years to build the largest — the tomb of Shoopho — which is not at all an exaggerated view of the necessary time. There are about ten others, none of which could have been built in less than 20 years. The re- mainder may have occupied fiom 3 to 10 years each. Then 1X80 80 " 10x20 200 " 13 X say 5 years. 65 ■ 295, or about 800 years. Mr. Gliddon then assumes that all these pyra- mids " were built consecutively" which must have been the method, since they are the sepulchres of consecutive kings, etc.* Finally, on this subject, Mr. Gliddon argues that, "taking the deluge at any given point within the chronology of the Septuagjnt — say b. c. 3200— and "Menei," the first Pharaoh of Egypt, about 2700, we allow 500 years for the migration of man into Egypt and his progress towards civ- ilization, till he could build one pyramid. In al- lowing 500 years more for the erection of all those pyramids at Meroe, in Ethiopia, and in Egypt, we have sufficient time for their possible construction," etc.* But, in reference to these statements, all of which, as we see, are founded on ^'■probability,^' " conjecture^'' and the like, I remark — 1. In reference to the period of "about 400 > Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 47. 3 lb. p. 57. 2 lb. pp. 54, 55. 1 lb. p. 36. years which Mr. Gliddon makes to intervene between " Mizraim" and " Menes," as " the first Pharaoh of Egypt," Dr. Scyffarth, one of the most learned and distinguished Egyptologists of the present age, affirms that Mizraim and Menes are identical. Adopting the Septuagint version as the basis of his chronology, he makes " Menes (Mizraim) to have moved from Babel to Egypt 666 years from the deluge, — at the dispersion of the nations from Babel, and the origin of dia- lects and languages, in the time of Peleg. — Gen. xi. 9, A. M. 3087, B. c. 2783."' And, indeed, if we understand Mr. Gliddon, he evidently, in one of his two-shilling pamphlets of 1843, makes Mizraim and Menes to be the same person. Speaking of the " unplaced kings," as given in Manetho's work, he says : " In making due allow- ance for possible repetition of the same kings' names in variations of cartouches, or otherwise, and rejecting as double cases many others, we have, in hieroglyphics, more than sixty unplaced kings, who must have lived and reigned between Menes and the sixteenth dynasty, or between Mizraim and Abraham" — which must, if there be any meaning in language, refer to the same period — " wherewith to fill up some portion of the blank of history."" I remark — ■ 2. Mr. Gliddon contends for the " dncontem- poEANEOUSNEss" of the kings of Egypt, from the time of "Menes," etc.;' whereas Dr. Scyffarth stoutly contends "that between Menes and the eighteenth dynasty, several dynasties must have ruled simultaneously in Upper and Lower Egypt, which was early divided into twelve provinces, or nomi ;" and he adds, " The question now is, which of these Manethonian dynasties were contempora- neous? Eratosthenes has left us a translation of a list of the Pharaohs from Menes to the end of the eighteenth dynasty (1647 b. c), together with a statement of the years of the respective reigns of these kings ; and from these it is mani- fest, not only that Menes did not come from Baby- lon into Egypt until the aforementioned year, 2781 b. c, but also that among the earlier dynas- ties enumerated by Manetho, the first, twelfth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth were only successive, and that the intervening ones were contemporaneous with them." Further, he says : " The same Egyptian history is established with still greater certainty by the Table of Abydos, now in the British Museum, of the year 1600 > "Summary," etc., appendix, p. 212. See also on thia subject, pp. 12, 13, 22, 34, 61, 93, 94, 106, 107, 108, 109, 113, etc. 2 Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 60. ' lb. p. 57. 68 OUR BIBLK CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. B. c, on which all the Egyptian kings of the first, twelfth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth dynasties are enumerated in their regular order, but all the intervening ones entirely omitted. Fi- nally, we have, in addition, the Table of Karnak for the year 1700 b. c, which divides the kings from Menes to the eighteenth dynasty into two series, by arranging those that ruled successively on one side, and those that were their contempo- raries on the other. Thus, then, the strife which has lasted so many years respecting Manetho's dynasties, and the true commencement of Egyp- tian history, has at last been set at rest.'" To the above I add — 3. That Mr. Gliddon, speaking of the pyra- mids, says " the Hebrews had nothing to do with them, except to look at them from the opposite shore of the Nile." Again, he says that "the monuments are silent about the Hebrews ;" that " the Egyptian records are altogether silent about the Jewish sojourn in Egypt," etc. Nevertheless, he adds, " we meet with some extraordinary co- incidences confiimatory of Biblical chronology and history after the time of Moses, and corrobo- rative of the computations of the Hebrew ver- sion from him downward." ' But how, I would ask, are the first two statements, as above, to be reconciled with the fact that upon the walls of the principal temple of Thebes, that of "Karnak," have been found numerous hieroglyphical inscrip- tions descriptive of the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt 1 I refer the reader on this subject to our notice of the tablet of the tomb of Eekshave, under Pharaoh Moeris, depicting the servitudes of the Israelites under their taskmasters in Egypt, as given in page 63 of this work; and also to Mr. Gliddon's /'extraordinary coincidences," a specimen of which he gives in the form of a mon- umental cartouch in page 9 of "Ancient Egypt," in proof of the fallacy of his statement, that " the monuments are silent about the Hebrews," etc. Again — 4. Mr. Gliddon ascribes the building of the largest pyramid near Cairo, and properly so, to Suphis (Shoopho — Saophis), who is the Cheops of Herodotus — and who, by a very learned philo- logical disquisition on Suphis, represented as the second, and Shoopho as the third king of the fourth dynasty, according to Manetho, he proves to be " one and the same name," but affirms that it was erected in the time of " the fourth Mem- phite dynasty ^''^ But here again I quote from Dr. Scyffarth. He says : name of > "Summary," etc., pp. 108, 109. ' " Anoiout Egypt," oto., p. 61. » lb. p. 56. " To the most remarkable among the antiqui- ties in Dr. Abbott's museum belongs a heavy gold signet-ring (No. 1050), bearing upon it the King ^— «=>^«i5^ (™™)' Cheops. This was the king who, according to Herodotus, built the great pyramid at Ghizeh, and his name has actually been found in the chamber of this pyramid." Then he asks, " But at what precise time Tnay this wonder of the world have been erected 2" " Mr. Lipsius," he says, " places the pyramid before the flood, and even before the creation." We have seen that Mr. Gliddon places it in the time of "the fourth Memphite dynasty." " Yet," says Dr. Scyffarth, " it may be well to hear what Herodotus, whom Mr. Lipsius does not name, has to say on the subject. Herodotus, Book II., chap. 99, mentions all the particularly remarkable kings from Menes down to his own time. Among those who succeeded Menes, the more remarkable were Moeris, the ninth king of the eighteenth dynasty, 1777 b. c; after him his son Sesostris (Osimandya), 1731 b. c; then Phe- ron (Rameses the Great), 1694 b. c. ; then Proteus, at the time of the Trojan war; then Rhampsinit; TiiE>f ouK Cheops, etc. . . . Thus, then, the erection of the great pyramid occurred long sub- sequent to the end of the eighteenth dynasty ; nay, its date is later even than that of the Trojan war, which, according to the unanimous testimony of antiquity, took place about 1200 years b. c. During this time Egypt was governed by the kings of the twentieth dynasty, whose names the transcribers of Manetho have unfortunately not preserved. In short," Dr. Scyffarth adds, "the pyramid of Cheops was not built before the crea- tion and the flood, but as late as the period of the twentieth dynasty," etc.' Once more on this subject : 5. In reference to the time required for the erection of the pyramids — namely, 300 years — Mr. Gliddon says, " As for the reduction of raj system to a narrower limit, it cannot be done without abandoning facts, logical deductions, and truth itself;" and on this ground he contends " for the imperious necessity for a more extended chronology than the Hebrew version." ° It appears then that it is, first, on the fact of Mizraim's priority in the order of time to Menes by at least 400 years ;' and second, that to " the fourth Memphite dynasty," as being " (to us) the most important of all," in that it was the period • " Summary," etc., pp. 118, 114. > "Ancient Egypt," etc., p. 57. ' lb. p. 48. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 69 of the erection of those "wonders of the world, the eternal pyramids, whose existence astounds our credence, whose antiquity has been a dream, whose epoch is a mystery," etc. ;' — it is upon these facts that Mr. Gliddon principally relies to prove "the imperious necessity for a more ex- tended chronolo.iy than the Hebrew version.'' Before proceeding, however, to a summary of the histoiic facts already laid before the reader as evidence of the fallacy of these assumptions, it is important to state, that while Mr. Gliddon holds the " epoch of the accession of Menes" as the first Pharaoh to be " a fundamental point in all subsequent Egyptian history," yet he positively affirms that " wc cannot define with precision the epoch of Menes within 500 years!"' A good beginning this, verily, in that it can be made so readily to accommodate itself to that theory of perhapses, probablies, conjectures, and the like, on which this learned Egyptologist labors to im- pugn the chronology of the Hebrew version. And while we would here state that we are no more prepared to endorse the chronological sys- tem of Dr. Scyffarth as a Septuagintarian in these premises than that of Mr. Gliddon, yet we submit that, as an Egyptologist, the learned Ger- man, instead of leaving all either to bold asser- tion or mere conjecture, as does our late Ameri- can consul at Cairo, furnishes his reader with au- thentic historical data in proof of every fact of which he speaks. ' To sum up the whole, then, let us look at the result which is legitimately educed from these facts. 1st. It is clear that Mizraim and Menes are one and the same person. This disposes of Mr. Gliddoa's interval of about 400 years, and places the first Egyptian Pharaoh that much nearer to the time of the flood. 2d. It is clear, that of " the fourth Memphite dynasty," embracing in all eight kings, whose reign Mr. Gliddon affirms to have been " consecu- tive," and to have extended over a period of 448 years — thereby giving to each king an average reign of 56 years — there were, during that dy- nasty, and also subsequently, many kings who reigned simultaneously. We are warranted, there- fore, in reducing the above-named period at least one-half — or 224 years. 3d. It is clear that the enslaved Hebrews in Egypt not only saw, but participated in the erec- tion of those stupendous mausoleums, etc., etc., reared under those Pharaohs "who knew not Joseph."' ' " Ancient Egypt," p. 54. s Consult Exod. i. 8-11. 1 lb. p. 51. 4th. It is clear that the largest pyramid, built by Shoopho or Cheops, at Ghizeh, near Cairo, was erected, not during the fourth Memphite, but long subsequent to the end of the eighteenth dynasty. And finally — 5th. It is clear that, according to Mr. Glid- don's own showing, the time alleged by him as indispensable to their erection, may be consider- ably reduced. We here propose to take in all the pyramids of which he speaks. The first in order are those of "Venephes," who, as "the third king from Menes, according to the text- book of Manetho," erected the pyramids near Cochome, or Choe."' The next in order are those of Memphis, "near the villages Aboo- rooash, Ghizeh, Abooseer, Zaccara, and Dash- oor."' The third, the 139 pyramids in Ethiopia, 80 of which, those at Meroe, Mr. Gliddon in- forms us were erected subsequent to those at Memphis.' Now, this learned Egyptologist, in speaking of the purposes for which these pyra- mids were erected, says, "It does seem ridiculous and supererogatory, after the uses we know the Egyptians made of these edifices, to speculate upon the relations these kingly tombs may have had to the stars ;" and adds, " they were all tombs, and nothing else. Kings were buried in them, and perhaps queens. In some (the pyra- mid of five steps at Zaccara, for instance), other persons may have also been buried besides the monarch — probably members of the royal family, or of the royal household." And again he says, " In Egypt, people built their sepulchres during their own lifetime ;" and of those in Memphis, which were the largest, he informs us that they "are all surrounded with countless tombs, pits, excavations, passages, subterraneous works, and superficial structures — all exclusively dedicated to the dead ; and," he adds, " if millions of mum- mies have, in the last 1500 years, been removed and destroyed, there are millions still unmolested in that burial-ground, to attest the vast popula- tion of ancient Memphis." * Now, in view of the above, though Mr. Glid- don tells us that " he has verified much in per- sonal travels and through favorite occupations, during a sojourn prolonged in Egypt for the greater part of twenty-three years;"' also, that "it will be conceded that a person who, like him- self, has resided for years in constant sight of these mausolse — who has spent, at different inter- vals, many months in exploring them and their vicinities — who has ascended the great pyramid 1 "Ancient Egypt," etc., p. 55. = lb. p. 54. » lb. p. 55. " lb. pp. 54, 67. <• lb. p. 42. 70 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. (that of Shoopho or Cheops) a score of times, and entered frequently into all the chambers, pas- sages, etc., of the others — has at least had an op- portunity of gleaning some knowledge of them," etc ;' yet when, as an Egyptological chronolo- gist, he tells us that he cannot determine Menes' accession to the throne of Egypt within 500 years, nor even inform us of the length of his reign — e. g., " The king, Menei, exercised royal at- tributes years ;" " and says of Venephes, the third king from Menes, " We may conjecture that he occupied the throne within 100 years from that monarch;"' and finall)', who in one place makes Venephes to have erected the most ancient pyramids, and in another says "history enables us to carry back the foundation of Mem- •phis to the accession of the first king, Menes," and that " it is in her necropolis or burial-ground we find those monuments which, in size as in an- tiquity, EXCEED ALL OTHERS IN THE WORLD, viz. the pyramids of Ghizeh, Abooseer, Zaccara, and Dashoor, with some tombs coeval with, if not antecedent to, the erection of the earliest /" ' — I re- peat, when such a writer claims to enlighten us, even in the abstract, on the important subject of the monumental remains of ancient Egypt, — but especially, when all the scholarship and ingenuity of which he is possessed are employed to turn them to the overthrow of the inspired chronology of the Hebrew Scriptures, — with all the advan- tages he boasts of, yea, and though increased a thousand-fold, I submit that he is not entitled to the position in the world of letters of a reliable historian. ' Further evidence, however, according to his own showing, may be drawn from the period claimed by him for the erection of the pyramids at Memphis — 300 years. We will start with those of "Venephes," which, in one place Mr. Gliddon has told us " shows historically the an- tiquity of pyramidal constructions."" Having proved above the identity of Mizraim and Menes, and also the contemporaneousness of the kings of Egypt after his time,° and supposing, according to Mr. Gliddon's statement, that those built by Venephes 100 years after Menes were the most ancient, then, if we take into the account, first, the fact that the terms pyramids, tombs, sepul- chres, etc., are employed interchangeably by Mr. Gliddon to denote the same thing — that is, that they were " all exclusively dedicated to the dead" — " all torabs, and nothing else ;" second, 1 "Ancient Egypt," etc., p. 54. » lb. p. 53. » lb. p. 55. ' lb. p. 53. = lb. p. 55. « See pp. 67, 68 of this worlc. that according to his own account they were the receptacles of kings not only, but of queens, members of the royal families and households, and also of many others; and, third, that they were also built by kings not only, but that " the people built their sepulchres during their own lifetime," the "millions of mummies" both ex- humed and still remaining in them being ad- duced as evidence of the "vast- population" of Egypt; — I say, in view of these and the like facts, wherein, it may be demanded, is it a thing in- credible that these pyramids, large and small, scattered on both sides of the Nilotic valley, from Memphis to Meroe, a distance of 1500 miles, should have been erected simultaneously here and there — e. ff., in Egypt, in Ethiopia, at Ghizeh, Meroe, Cochome or Choe, etc. — by both kings and people? Surely the materials were not wanting ; the population was fully equal to the task — e. ff., that of Memphis; and, what is specially germain to this subject, the very reli- gion of the Egyptians was the foundation on which they were erected. The doctrine of trans- migration, or the passing of the soul at death from one body to another, but which, after wan- dering hither and yon for myriads of ages, was to return to the original body again, at which time it was to enter a felicitous state — this doc- trine, which was believed and taught by the Egyptians, and which led to the practice of em- balming the dead, led also to the erection of those stupendous sepulchres, tombs, or pyramids, for purposes of permanently safe deposits. It is therefore, I submit, against reason to sup- pose that even the " kingly tombs" were erected consecutively. It is equally against reason to suppose that those pyramids erected by the peo- ple during their lifetime awaited the completion of those of their royal monarchs. And I now ask whether, with these facts before us, it does not inevitably follow that these pyraniidal tombs or sepulchres of Egypt, from the first to~ the last, must have been erected within at least one- half of the period assigned to them by Mr. Glid- don ? — an hypothesis this which, while we claim it to be in perfect accordance with the law of analogy, and in regard to which we court refuta- tion, we shall see presently' to be in entire har- mony with the shorter chronology of the Hebrew version. Finally — If to this it be objected that in the " Types of Mankind," etc., as put forth by Messrs. Nott and Gliddon, there is a large lithographed head of an Egyptian king, underscored, "Tub Proprietor — most ancient tomb extant, foxirth OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED 71 dynasty (b. c. 3500), now in the Royal Museum, Berlin" — I reply, first, that the head is without a name; but, second, as the fourth Memphite dynasty extended over a period of 448 years ac- cording to Mr. Gliddon, it is as likely to repre- sent the last as the first king ; besides which, Mr. Gliddon cannot determine the chronology of " Menei," as the founder of the Memphite dynasties, within the period of 500 years ! It follows, therefore, from this uncertainty of near 1000 years, that the date appended to the above head (b. c. 8500) is altogether arbitrary. And so of all the others. Mr. Gliddon, the reader will recollect, is of the Champollion school of Egypto-hieroglyphic interpreters. But Dr. ScyfFarth says of this entire system, "After the world had, for twenty-five whole years, made laborious and fruitless efforts to turn this [sym- bolic] system to practical account, Bunsen, in 1846, acknowledged, as well as his friends Lip- sius and Birch, ' We declare decidedly that there is not a man alive who could read and fexplain [according to Champollion's system] any whole section of the book of the dead, much less a his- torical papyrus.' ' And why not ? All the rules laid down by Champollion proved to be wrong ; all his efforts were made in a wrong direction. His entire [symbolical] system was based updn hypotheses that contradict history, and upon the deciphering of very short sentences, severed from their connection, which, precisely because they were too short and disconnected, are susceptible of a hundred different explanations. Of such his whole grammar is full. Had Champollion en- deavored, first of all, to decipher the Eosetta in- scription, and entire hieroglyphic texts from be- ginning to end, he would have propounded an entirely different system — that is, the syllabic system.'" Again : That Mr. Gliddon gains nothing by endorsing the speculations of the Chevalier Li)sius, "the publication of whose researches," hg says, " implies simply the credulity of igno- rance"' on the part of those who reject the light reflected by them, will appear from the following. "The celebrated Lipsius, of Berlin," says Dr. Scyffarth, " has, in his great work on Egyptian history, made the immortal discovery that Menes, the first king of the country, reigned before our dates of the flood and of the creation; that 'the 1 Bunsen, "jEgypten's Stellung in der Weltgeeohiohte." Hamburg, 1845. L. 320. a " Summary," etc., pp. 46, 47. Sec also pp. 22-24 of this work. ' "Types of Maukind," p. 60. deluge was confined to but a small portion of the globe ;' that ' the sacred Scriptures contain no chronology ;' that ' the chronology of the Bible must accommodate itself to that of the Egyptians [N. B., as interpreted by Mr. L^sius], and so forth. This great savant, however, has exhibited in all his writings to the present day such a de- gree of ignorance, heedlessness, and levity, that there is no need of any refutation of his chimeras. Mr. Lipsius has not even learnt, as yet, that all great kingdoms and empires have originated in( smaller ones ; that, consequently, also, Manetho's dynasties must, fi'om the very beginning, have been contemporaneous. Mr. Lfosius, knowing that the Vetus Chronicon, the oldest Egyptian history, gives to all the kings of the first fifteen dynasties since Menes no more than four hun- dred and forty-four years, makes the same dy- nasties successive, and ^ves them, in spite of genuine historical traditions, more than 3000 years,"' etc. So much, then, for the theory of the alleged monumental remains of ancient Egypt, as evi- dence of " the imperious necessity for a more ex- tended chronology than the Hebrew version." SECTION VII. Examination of Dr. ScyffartKs system of the Egyptian planetary configurations of the four great world-ages of the ancients, in its applica- tion to the chronology of the Hebrew Scriptures. II. BoT we have now to turn to an examina- tion of the theory, to the same end, as propounded by the learned Dr. Scyffarth in his " Summary of recent Discoveries in Biblical Chronology, Uni- versal History, and Egyptian Archaeology," etc. Dr. S. has been already introduced to the reader as a Septuagintarian. His defence of the Septua- gint, as containing what he claims to be the only true chronology of Scripture, is the most impos- ing and plausible, as it is the latest of any that has fallen under our observation. His theory, when reduced to a tangible form, consists in an ALLEGED COINCIDENCE BETWEEN THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE SbPTUAGINT, AND THE MATHEMATICALLY CERTAIN SYSTEM OF THE PLANETARY CONFIGURA- ' Summary," etc., pp. 106, 107. 72 OUB BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. TIONS OF THE FOUR GREAT WORLD-AGES OF THE ANCIENTS. By this theory he claims to have demonstrated the infallible accuracy, even to a day, of the chronological dates of the Greek ver- sion. He says — "Among all the nations of antiquity old as- tronomical observations were preserved, hy means of which the beginning of the four world- periods, the date of the deluge, the arrival of Menes in Egypt in the days of Phaleg, the ar- rival of the Israelites in Mizraim, the birth of Moses, the exode of the Hebrews, and many other historical events, become fixed as certainly as the multiplication table ; and all these epochs thus fixed do not harmonize with the Hebrew chronology, etc. — but, on the contrary, they agree with the Septuagint." ' In another place,- speak- ing of the two versions, he refers us to the fact that Christ and his Apostles and Evangelists, in the sight of all men, quoted, "as the word of God," from the Septuagint, which, he argues, they would not have done, had the record been ''falsified:' . . . "Thus," he adds, "the chro- nology of the Septuagint is confirmed by the New Testament, and no Christian will demand any other proofs.'' Now, then, for the doctor's conclusion, as drawn from these facts : — " Whosoever regards the New Testament as inspired, and this is, of course, the position maintained by the whole Christian Church, is thus bound to acknowledge that the Septuagint contains the true chronology. Whoever,- on the contrary, rejects the testimony of Christ and the Apostles and Evangelists,' ac- cepting the chronology in the Hebrew text as the true one, denies, in so doing, the inspiration of the New Testament, and is not, therefore, re- ally a Christian, however much he may boast of his orthodoxy."' Again, a little further on he says — " Whoever regards the present chronology of the Hebrew Testament as infallibly correct, must, of necessity, also look upon the prophets as fallible men, and upon the Old Testament as in the main uninspired. But he that entertains such views is surely, in his heart, neither Chris- tian, nor Jew, nor Mohammedan." ' And, finally, having told us that " the seventy . . . translated under such an influence of the Holy Spirit, that all were of one and the same mind ;" and also that " respectable Fathers of the Church testify, without being contradicted by others, that the original chronology of the Bible was preserved in the Septuagint, but designedly falsified in the Hebrew," he adds — "He who ventures to de- nounce as liars such holy men [i. e., the Fathers], who have been, at all times, ranked next to the Apostles, is not far from rejecting the testimony of the Apostles and Evangelists themselves.'" Sad alternative, this, to a conscientious anj,i- Septuagintist, to be " bound" either to surrender that version of the Holy Scriptures which he re- ceives as authoritative in determining the true chronology of the world ; or to involve himself in such a denial of " the inspiration of the Old Tes- tament" as translated by the inspired " seventy," and such a denunciation of those — Christ, the Apostles and Evangelists, and the respectable Fathers of the Church — " as liars," as to deny him a place among either Christians, Jews, or Turks ! .But, this decision of Dr. S. to the con- trary notwithstanding, we respectfully urge our plea of entire immunity from such an alternative, and that on the following grounds : First : The point of difference in the premises between the two versions, the reader will observe, relates exclusively to their respective chronologies. Now, can the learned doctor, or any of his advo- cates, refer us to a single instance, in the quota- tions made by Christ, the Apostles, and Evangelists, from the Septuagint, that has the least reference to its chronology ? So far from it, there is not, in any one of those quotations, amounting in all to 174, a single allusion made to that subject. And, in addition to the list of these quotwtions as given by " Home" in page 27 of this work — show- ing wherein the Hebrew and Septuagint agree and differ — we have furnished the reasons at length, wherefore Christ, the Apostles, and Evan- gelists preserved entire silence in regard to it.' These reasons, I now proceed to show. Second — Were in part furnished to our hand by Dr. S. himself. Having preferred against " the apostate Akiba" the charge of falsifying the true chronology, he supposes some one to start "the following philosophical objections;" — 1. That " the Lord could not permit any falsifi- cation of his holy and revealed Word ;" to which he replies — " This is, however, a mere hypothesis, which confutes itself. For," he says, "the an- cient manuscripts of the Old and New Testa- ments contain, as is well known, a great many corruptions . . . different readings in the He- brew and in the Greek Bible." And he quotes Watton, Kennicott, and Teller, in proof. He ■ Summary, etc., p. 159. s ]b. p. 187. » lb. pp. 181, 132. » Summary, oto., pp. 138, 139. » See pp. 51-56 of this work. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 73 then adds : " Further, as God has permitted all crimes of men since Adam, so lie has permitted, also, both designed and unintentional alterations of his Holy Word, in respect to chronology and other subjects ;" and he refers us to the Samari- tan, the Hebrew, and the Septuagint versions in illustration. Then, in regard particularly to the last, he says : " Now, suppose the chronology of the LXX to be a falsified one — had God per- mitted the falsification of his Holy Word, or not? Did he not permit such a falsified Bible to get into the hands of many millions of Jews and Christians, and to pass among thera during two thousand years, even down to the present day, for the true Word of God ?" . . . " How then," he demands, " may any one assert, or attempt to demonstrate, that God was obliged to preserve the Hebrew text of the Old Testament uncor- rupted, even in the smallest particulars ?" ' Granted, Doctor. Then why denounce a man, in either case, as being neither Christian, Jew, nor Mohammedan, on account of a difference of view " in respect to chronology ?" But this is not all. The doctor has another supposed " philosophical objection," which is, that '■'■cautious and scrupu- lous rnen" on the hypothesis that the Septuagint alone has *^ preserved the true chronology^'' . . . " will lose all confidence in the Bible, and the whole Christian Church will be shaken to its foundation" etc. "But, God be praised," he says, "nothing of the kind is necessary. For the Word of God, in all that is essential to our salvation, is contained in the Hebrew Bible, in Luther's translation, and in the authorized Ung- lish version, as well as in the Septuagint. The question," he adds, " whether Adam was created 2000 years earlier or later, does not at all belong to those articles of faith, which are vitally im- portant to human salvation." . . . "Everybody knows that God has permitted a vast number of alterations, both unintentional and designed," — aye, and mark, reader, as well "in respect to chrmologj)" as of " other subjects," — " in all copies of the Old and New Testaments." There- fore, he concludes, " there is no reason whatever for seeking, henceforward, the Word of God ra- ther in the Septuagint than in the Hebrew, or in Luther's or the English version," etc' Now, with all deference, we leave it with any who may choose the task, to reconcile the above with the declaration, that a denial "that the Septuagint contains the true chronology" in- volves also a denial of the inspiration of the Old > Summary, etc., pp. 119-121. 10 » lb. pp. 128, 129. and New Testaments ; nay, more, that such a man is neither Christian, Jew, nor Turk : and as an additional inducement to some one to make the attempt, we would throw in the following admission of the learned doctor to help him in his work. He says — "Finally, as the Eabbis have, since the eighth century, numbered the letters of every Biblical section, recording their numbers at the end of each, the Hebrew text has, of course, been copied with greater accuracy than its Greek translation. From all this we arrive at the conclusion, that in all passages in which the Greek text does not agree with the Hebrew, the latter \i. e., the Hebrew] must be preferred. Only those passages of the Septuagint must be excepted which have been quoted in the New Testament, and to have been thus sanctioned by Christ, the Apostles, and Evangelists."' If, then, there be any meaning in language. Dr. Scyfi^arth has himself settled the important question, as to which of the two versions is au- thoritative in these premises, in favor of the He- brew ; for, in addition to the fact that though all the different versions " contain a great many corruptions," yet that, so far as it relates to the Hebrew and Septuagint, as the doctor declares, " in general both texts agree entirely, and word for word."* He here admits that the "Hebrew text has been copied," at least for 1000 years last past, " with greater accuracy than its Greek trans- lation ;" and therefore " that in all passages in which the Greek does not agree with the Hebrew, the latter must be preferred." But, as we have shown above, the variations in the two versions relate to the chronology only, to which subject neither Christ nor his Apostles and Evangelists, in their quotations from the Septuagint, ever refer at- all. And as "in general both texts agree en- tirely, and word for word," on all other subjects, the inevitable inference is, that the "greater ac- curacy" of the Hebrew over the Greek version relates alone to the subject of chronology. Ergo, the Hebrew text, and the English translation as derived from it of the present day — ^Dr. Scyffarth being judge — constitute the only inspired or au- thoritative version in determining the true chro- nology of the world. * This point settled, the plausibleness with which Dr. Scyffarth puts forth his theory of "plan- etary ooNriGURATiONS," and the ingenuity with which he applies them as tests of the infallible accuracy, even to a year and a day, of the chro- nology of the Septuagint, alone justify the appro- 1 Summary, etc., p. 130. » lb. p. 180. 74 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. priation of any further space in our animadver- sions thereon. A succinct exhibit of both will be sufGcient. As the doctor's book is published " with spe- cial reference to Dr. Abbott's Egyptian Museum in New York" ' — in which he says " the higher arts and sciences of the ancient Egyptians are mirrored in nearly all the objects contained in the museum" — "to the scientific ckiss," he ob- serves, "belong the astronomical monuments."^ Adopting these as the basis of his theory, he affirms an antiquity to astronomy as practised by " the ancient Komans, Greeks, Egyptians, Ethio- pians, Arabians, Phoenicians, Chaldeans, Baby- lonians, Hindoos, Chinese, Japanese, Persians, and even Mexicans, as far back as the creation of man ;" that " Seth was the originator of the science ;" that " our zodiac is as old as the human race ;" and that as " all the ancients were ac- quainted with the gradual revolution of the en- tire starry heavens from west to east, and their great world-period of 36,000 years was based upon this fact," so to their " planetary observa- tions belong the four ages of the world, and the planetary configurations observed at their re- spective commencements." This great " world- period," he says, was divided in the following manner: "As the ecliptic, in which the sun per- forms its course, is divided into 360' degrees, the ancients calculated 36,000 years for the revolu- tion of the entire heavens; and as the ecliptic was divided into 12 signs of 30 degrees each, the time of the precession of the heavens through a sign, or 30 degrees each, would consequently be 3000 years." Then further — " The periods dur- ing which the equinoctial point passes through the different signs of 30 degrees constituted the basis of the so-called ages of the world among the ancients," which the Greeks and Romans ex- pressed by means of the reigns of the gods — terming " the golden age, Uranus ; the silver age, Saturn ; the brazen age, Jupiter ; and the iron age. Mars ;" — and as " each of these four ages of the world comprised 3000 years, in round num- bers, the ancients," he says, " have preserved the observations of the planetary configurations as they tocjc place at the commencement of these four periods respectively." The first commenced A, M. 1, B.C. 5811 ; the second is recorded in the Zendavesta, the sacred writings of the Parsees, and relates to the year 3725 b. c. ; the third is preserved in the Eamayana, the celebrated epo- pee of the ancient Hindoos, and relates to the ■ Seo title-page. ^ Summary, etc., p. 15. year ISVO b. c; and the fourth — the age.in which we still live — is to be found in the later Vedas, the sacred writings of the Hindoos, and relates to the year S98 a. c' The learned doctor then states: "It is self- evident that this inquiry is of the utmost impor- tance, inasmuch as these ages among the ancient nations begin with the very year and the day of the creation," — viz., that it was "the year 5871 B.C., and on the 10th of Julian May, which at that time was the day of the vernal equinox, and a Sunday 1" — and he affirms that " they are based upon mathematical and incontestable truth." ' He also says that, compared with the planetary con- figurations of these four world-ages, the recorded observations of the position of the planets by the Egyptians, 3000 years before Ptolemy's day, prove that astronomer's eclipses, together with his lunar tables, etc., to be all wrong f and says that " all the events of ancient history to which such planetary configurations, as observed by the ancients themselves, are linked, are by means of the planetary configurations chronologically de- termined with incontrovertible certainty:"^ and he adds, as the whole history of Egypt, based on these mathematical truths, is now determined even to -years and days,' why, this theory " is of the utmost importance for the correction of an- cient history," and that "it is therefore to be hoped that astronomers by profession will make themselves acquainted with the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians," etc.* In view of the above, then, I submit, we are fully warranted in expecting, yea, and in demand- ing, an undeviatingly uniform and mathematically accurate system of measurement of the number of years of equinoctial precession to a degree, as adopted by the Egyptians, in determining the length of the four great world-ages. On this circumstance depends the entire merits of the doc- tor's theory, in its practical application to the subject in hand. Let us see, then, if the doctor's theory fully meets this reasonable condition. Having informed us that " our planetary tables are based upon the observations of Ptolemy, 130 B. c," he says, " But as at that time there were no instruments for making astronomical measure- ments, these observations of Ptolemy must neces- sarily contain errors ; and these increase consid- erably in importance as we go back toward earlier dates," etc. In contrast with this — " We are now acquainted with planetary places and 1 Siumnary, etc., pp. 21-99. ' lb. pp. 98, 99.' s lb. p. 24. « lb. p. 88. » lb. p. 107. « lb. p. 106. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 16 constellations, which, among the Koraans," says the doctor, "are 800, among the Greeks 900, and among the Egyptians 3000 years older than those of Ptolemy," by means of which our planet- ary tables can be corrected." Unquestionably, then, this circumstance can only be accounted for from the fact of the much more advanced state of the arts and sciences among the ancients, and especially the Egyptians 3000 years before Ptolemy's day, by which they were furnished with a complete and perfect astro- nomical apparatus with which to make their ob- servations. Let Dr. S. decide, "^s the ancients had no telescopes, they were unable to determine this phenomena [i. e., the precession of the equi- noctial point] with sufficient accuracy, and there- fore assumed that the heavens moved but one degree in every 100 years!"' This, however, when applied to the four world-ages of 3000 years each, would place the creation 12,000 years b. c, instead of 68ll years, the alleged true chronology of the Septuagint 1 What then? Why, a reduction must be made in the length of the equinoctial precession from 100 to 72 years: nor this only — " As the equinoctial point moves backward one degree even in 72 years," a, further reduction is necessary, in order to make " the ex- act number of years for each world-age'' to con- sist of "2146 years!"' Well, When applied to the commencement and termination of each world-age successively, as described above (p. 74), they of course will all come out " exact," not only to a year, but even a day. Alas, " it was the last age only," says the doctor, "that was made 30 years too long by the Hindoos !" Blundering blockheads, these Hindoos, thus to spoil Dr. S.'s ingeniously constructed planetary configurations of the ancient Egyptians, etc., etc., etc., by which he had set out to correct the chronology of general history, to rectify modern astronomy, and to prove the infallibility of the chronology of the Greek version ! We have not as yet, however, reached the climax of proof, that the theory of " planetary configurations" forms the basis of those "mathe- matical truths" which determine the measure of the four great world-ages, and which is "the only basis of a true chronology, and the only in- strument for correcting, with mathematical cer- tainty, the ancient history and chronology, since the day of creation." We have to plod on to ' Summary, etc., p. 97. ' lb. pp. 97, 98. the 157th page of the "Summary," before we discover this. Here the learned doctor again enumerates the four world-ages, in connection with the planetary configurations. Then he adds — " All these [i. e., the four world-ages] have their origin, not in planetary configura- tions, are not the result of calculations — for the ancients had neither the system of Copernicus nor astronomical tables — but from autoptical . CONTEMPLATIONS OF THE STARRY HEAVENS," etC. I submit, therefore, whether, in view of this comparison of Dr. S. with himself we are not as much indebted to him for a complete refutation of his theory of "planetary configurations'' as a test of the truth of the Septuagint chronology, as for his having, from the same source, furnished us with such indubitable evidence of the inspired authority of the Hebrew version. To conclude this article, therefore, we remark, that the above theory, which Dr. S. at last re- solves into an " autoptical contemplation of the starry heavens," was nothing but the ancient system of astrology, practised by the Egyptian and Babylonian star-gazers ; and, which, though graced by them with the name of astronomy, was nothing more than the science which teaches one to judge of the effects and influences of the stars, and to foretell future events by their situations and different aspects. As a science, it was with the ancients in great request, as men ignorantly supposed the heavenly bodies to have a ruling influence over the physical and moral world ; but it is now universally exploded by true science and philosophy, and should be left un- molested with the wandering gipsies of our day, who still practise it as the means of ekeing out a miserable nomadic existence. Let me, however, only add one more word on this subject. This theory of "planetary con- figurations" was no novelty in the time of the Old Testament prophets. Isaiah, in his book (chap, xlvii. 13, 14), thus speaks of these diviners and counsellors of ancient Babylon in his day. Addressing himself to the dissolute monarch and inhabitants of that city, he says — " Thou art -ivea- ried in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the star-gazers, the monthly prog- nosticators, stand up and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame : there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it," etc. 1Q OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. CHAPTER V. DIRECT EVIDENCE IN PfiOOF OF THE CLAIMS OF THE SHORTER NUMBERS OF THE HEBREW VER- SION OVER THE EXPAKDED CHRONOLOGY OP THE SEPTUAGINT. We are still treating of the historic cliionology of Scripture. Having, however, as we think, ac- counted for the real circumstances which have occasioned all the perplexities, and which have originated all the difficulties attendant upon a satisfactory determination of the true chronology of Scripture, nothing more remains than to fur- nish the evidence that in the shorter numbers of the Hebrew version, is to be found the actual period of the world's history which has intervened between the creation and fall of man, and the Nativity. Here, however, we are met with the discrepan- cies in the chronology of the three versions — the Hebrew, the Samaritan, and the Septuagint— in regard to both the antediluvian and postdiluvian epochs. As we have seen,' of the antediluvian patriarchal genealogies, the whole number of years given by The Hebrew, from Adam to Noah, is 1056 years. The Samaritan, " " 1307 " The Septuagint, " " 2662 " We here perceive that the total of years from Adam to Noah in the Samaritan is less than the Hebrew by 349 years, while that of the Septua- gint exceeds the Hebre\Y by 600 years. Of the ^osic?i7MOTan patriarchal genealogies, the whole number of years given by The Hebrew, from Shem to Terah (i. e., to the iirifh of Abraham),* is 352 years. The Samaritan, from Shem to Terah, is 1002 " The Septuagint, " " 1053 " Here, in the total of years from Shem to Terah, the Samaritan exceeds the Hebrew by 650 years, and that of the Septuagint by 701 years. Fii-st, then, in regard to the antediluvian epoch, the following Table will show that the Samaritan numbers agree with those of the Hebrew in seven cases out of ten ; also that, where the Samaritan • See p. -15 of this work. " Abraham's birth is usually placed at the 70th year of Terah, on the supposition of his having been Terah's eldest Bon. But in the narrative of Moses, by a oomparison of Gen. xi, 32 and xil. 4, it is evident that, on Terah's death, at tlie age of 205 years, Abram, who then left Haran, was only 75 years old. That Haran was Terah's eldest son, will be shown in the sequel. differs from the Hebrew, the Septuagint agrees with it : Antedilutiam Fatbiabchs. Heb. Sam. Sept. Josef. .1. Adam 180 105 90 70 65 162 65 18T 182 600 180 106 90 TO 65 62 65 67 63 600 280" 205 190 170 166 162 165 187 188 600 280 205 8. Enos . . . t 190 170 165 6. Jared «t . . . 162 8. Methuselah 182 16.')6 1807 2262 22S6 It is here important to observe, that the varia- tions in this Table are evidently not the effect of accident, but of design, because the years of each patriarch at the hirth of his son and the residues agr«e in all cases with the total of lives (with this exception, that in the Samaritan, the residues in the 5th, Yth, and 9th are shortened), as may be seen from the following Table : Thus, in the Heb. and Samaritan, Adam has 180-1-800=980 1 y„„. In the Sept. anil Joeephlis 230-1-700=980 T Again, in the Heb. and Samaritan, Seth has 105-1-807=912 i In the Sept. and Josephus ,....205-1-707=912" °"' As to the motive of the Samaritans in this cor- ruption of the original Hebrew numbers, it was doubtless to make it appear that Jared, Methu- selah, and Lamech, with whom the above num- bers correspond, might not be thought to have perished in the catastrophe of the flood. Jerome, however, says that in his time there were some Samaritan copies which made Methuselah's and Lamech's ages, at the birth of their sons, the same as the Hebrew f and the missionary Joseph Wolff says, " In the ancient MSS. which I saw at Bok- hara, the chronological notices of the- length of the lives both of the antediluvian and postdiluvian patiiarchs was exactly according to the received Hebrew text, though the letters of the MSS. re- sembled the Samaritan." It is, however, with the differences in, Second, The postdiluvian chronology that we are more particularly concerned. Here, as the following Table will show, the Samaritan, Septua- gint, and Josephus all agree in the longer compu- tation. Thus : PoSTDILirVTAN PatKIAKOIIS. Heb. Sam, JOSEP. Sept. 11. SnEM (aged 100 at the flood) 2 85 80 84 80 82 80 29 180 2 185 lio 184 180 182 180 79 130 2 185 (180) 180 184 180 182 180 79 180 12 Cainan (spurious) 18. Balah U. Hebbb 15. Peleo.. 184 . 180 180 ■\g>. 16. Eeu 18. Nauor 120 180 19. Teeau 20 to Abraiiaki 852 1002 1002 1053 • 165 is doubtless the correct reading. " So say the compilers of our English Universal History OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 77 It may lieie be remarked that, faking the pre- ceding Tables together, the weight of evidence preponderates decidedly in favor of the Hebrew in that of the antediluvian patriarclis — the Samari- tan generally agreeing with it ; while in that of the postdiluvian it may rather be considered as in favor of the Septuagint and Josephus — the Samaritan agreeing more nearly with them. There is, however, this important circumstance in favor of the Hebrew ; viz., that the Samaritan, adding the totals as well as the residues (which the Hebrew and the Septuagint do not), these totals do, with two exceptions, accord with the Hebrew computation, and not with that of the Septuagint. Now, this disagreement indicates error and tampering with the Hebrew text either in the Samaritan or the Septuagint, and conse- quently diminishes the evidence derivable from their agreement in favor of those numbers in the first column in which they agree, as may be seen from the following Table : bebhew. SAMARITAN. SEPTUAGINT. Ag«. Res. Total. Ago. Rgi. Totnl. Age. Rus. Total. 2 85 80 84 80 82 SO 29 70 500 403 403 430 209 20T 200 119 602 438 483 464 239 239 230 148 205 103 135 130 134 130 132 130 79 +70 800 803 803 2T0 109 107 100 69 600* 488 488 404 239 239 230 148 145 102 185 180 134 130 132 189 79 70 600 408 803 270 209 207 200 129 002 538 460 404 339 839 330 208 205 Arphaxad Hkbbr Bub Nauor We have, as we think, in the preceding pages satisfactorily disposed of that great question, the settlement of which is fundamental to a deter- mination of the true chronology of Scripture — viz., an authoritative version. In the eight ex- amples of Samaritan and Jewish corruptions of the original Hebrew numbers that have been given in pages 39-47 of this work, together with the circumstances of time, places, and persons, and the motives with each to make the altera- tions, and also in our replies to the several objec- tions urged against our conclusions (pages 54-62), we claim to have demonstrated that the Hebrew text, or its equivalent English translation now in use, constitutes the only standard authority in this matter. The following important observation is here in place. Our Septuagintarians, " who imagine themselves at liberty to enlarge the period be- tween the FLOOD and Abraham's call to an in- definite amount, mistake the question. The un- certainty is not an uncertainty for want of testi- * It Bhould be 602. t i. e., to the birtli of his eldest son. . mony, like that which occurs in the early chro- nology of Greece, etc., where the times are un- certain, because no evidence was preserved, and an approximation of the truth is to be made by a comparison of different particulars. The uncer- tainty here is of a peculiar characte)', belonging to this particular case. The evidence exists, but in a DOUBLE form" (the Hebrew and the Greek Septuagint), "and we have to decide which is the authentic and genuine copy. But if the one is rejected, the other is established. Either the space before the flood was 1656 years or 2256. Either the period /row the flood to the call of Abraham was 1002 years or 427. These periods could not be greater than the greatest, nor less than the least." But, though we claim to have settled the above question in favor of the Hebrew version, there are nevertheless numerous objections, as founded iri the nature of the things treated of, which demand further notice. For instance — 1. It is objected, that the shorter Hebrew chro- nology " wholly violates the established economy of the universe, not only as exhibited to our view in the universal experience of mankind, but also as declared in the Scriptures themselves. It is a part of this economy, as described in the Book of Ecclesiastes (i. 4), that one generation passeth away, and another cometh." . . . "Now, accord- ing to the Hebrew chronology," says the objector, " no less than eleven generations of men, from Noah to Abraham, were alive upon the earth at one and the same time, and of these, Shem was called to bury eight generations of his own chil- dren, Eber six, and Serug one."' But, if there be any meaning in language, this objection af- firms that none of the patriarchs, between Noah and Abraham, could have outlived the genera- tions that immediately succeeded them. Even Serug, to have witnessed the death of one of his children, would have " wholly violated the estab- lished economy of the universe !" Happy patri- archs, these, to have been exempted from such " agony of soul !" Still, the above writer goes on to prove this. He alleges that, according to the Hebrew chronology, if true, it would make Noah to have outlived Peleg, in whose days the earth was divided ; on which hypothesis, he ar- gues that that event should have transpired in the days of Noah, which, he contends, involves the " diflBculties and paradoxes" following : viz., first, that it is opposed to " such an increase of the human race" as must have existed at that ' Gunninghame'a " Chron. of Israel and the Jews," etc., p. 109. 78 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. time ; aud, second, that it makes Noah himself, and his descendants, to have become mutually Tinintelhgible to each other, not only — a suppo- sition," he says, " which violates all probability as well as Scriptural analogy" — but that, "having, in his earlier days, seen, with agony of soul, the destruction of one world, he is made, in his old age, the sorrowful and impotent spectator of the almost universal apostasy of a second world, com- posed entirely of his own children." ' Quite pa- thetic, this ! In reply, however, it is only necessary to refer the reader, first, to what we have offered in pages 25, 26 of this work, in proof of the contempo- raneousness of the antediluvian patriarchs from Adam to Noah, and of the postdiluvian from Noah to Abraham, and thence to Moses (for which see Diagram, p. 26). And I ask : Is it not a fact that Adam was conversant with his direct descendants to the eighth generation ? Is it not also a fact, that "Noah lived after the flood 350 years,"' that is, down to a. m. 2006 ? It is, then, we must contend, worse than frivolous to urge against the Hebrew chronology, that it " wholly violates the established economy of the universe," that " one generation passeth away, and another Cometh." Then, in the next place, as to the other parts of this objection, we can see nothing incongruous to the fact that Noah himself should have been an eye-witness of the dispersion of his descendants at Babel, and also a participant in the confusion of tongues which occasioned it. His own act of inebriety* was but the germ of and a prelude to that tide of moral corruption which, in his own day — about 160 years from the flood — instigated the confusion of tongues and the dispersion of mankind. His having both shared in and seen that event, were nothing more than an act of just retribution for his own sin. But I pass on to another objection — 2. Against the Hebrew, Hales and Jackson had raised the following arguments : 1. That the age of puberty (of the naiSoyovia) may be considered as beginning after the lapse of one third part of life; and consequently that, when the average length of life was from 400 to 200 years, it was contrary to the course of nature for a man to have a son so early as thirty-two years of age — the average age, according to the Hebrew, from Arphaxad to Terah. 2. That the short He- brew computation is inconsistent with our ac- counts of the populousness of the earth at the > Cunninghame's "Chron. of Israel and the Jews," etc., pp. 108, 109. " See Gen. ix. 28. = lb. ix. 21-24. time of Abraham ; as also, 3. with the prevalence of idolatry in Abraham's country before his call, — Noah, Shem, &c., being, by the computation, still living. To these arguments in reference to " \hQ popu- lousness oi the earth in the time of Abraham," the following, in reference to the circumstances of the dispersion of mankind, is offered in evi- dence of the fact, as set forth in the shorter com- putation of the Hebrew copy. " The dispersion was effected by the immediate interposition of Providence, in opposition to the inclinations of mankind, who desired to dwell together, and were averse to the dispersion. Their object was to remain collected in one city. They built the Tower, ' lest they should be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earths It is manifest, then, that the dispersion was commanded while they were yet few in number. It was directed pros- pectively, with a view to prevent the evils that would arise from crowded numbers in a limited space. But at the time assigned to this event by the longer dates, more than 500 years after the flood, it was evident this was no longer the condition of mankind. For since their numbers would increase in the common progress of things to many millions, their dispersion would then have been no longer a matter of choice, but of necessity. It could not have proceeded from a divine command providing against a future evil, but would have been forced upon them by the actual presence of that evil. The dispersion, then, in the days of Pelkg took effect at an earlier period, while the number of mankind was yet a few thousands ; and Peleg was born where the Hebrew text places him, 101 years after the FLOOD. It is not likely that the numbers of mankind, when they received the command to separate, and prepared to inhabit one city, would exceed 50,000 persons ; and this number they certainly would have reached within IGO years after the flood." But this statement is further confirmed from a consideration, founded in the analogy of things, of what must have been the actual population of the earth, between the time of Arphaxad and the Call of Abraham. Hence, in the next place, we are to take into the account, that the age of puberty begins now much earlier than after the passing of a third part of life ; and that what it is now, that wo have Scripture evidence to prove that it was when the longevity of man was much greater. For instance, Judah at forty-eight wais a great- grandfather; Benjamin at thirty had eleven sons; and between Epliraini and Joshua there were ten OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 79 generations, which gives, on an average, twenty years to a generation. This being the case, the naidoyovia beginning then at about the same age as now, and continu- ing much longer, the rapid increase of the popu- lation, which the Hebrew copy supposes, between the flood and Abraham, is really accounted for. " In the present state of mankind it is calculated that the numbere of a people, under fMvorable circumstances, may be doubled in ten years. It has been proved by other calculations that the numbers have actually doubled in periods of twelve and four-fifth years, for short periods. In parts of North America, it is acknowledged that the people there doubled their numbers in fifteen years. The Israelites in Egypt doubled their numbers in periods of something less than fifteen years. Now the first families after the flood were placed in circumstances more favorable to rapid increase than in any other period of mankind. They were not gradually emerging from barba- rism, but possessed all the arts and civilization of the antediluvian world. They had unoccupied land before them, and their lives were extended to 500, 400, and 200 years. If we assume, then, that the population doubled itself in periods of twelve years, the population of the earth, begin- ning from six parents, would at 226 years arrive at more than 50,000,000 of persons, and in 300 years would amount to 200,000,000. If we take only the actual rate of increase which we know to have occurred in Egypt, and suppose fifteen years to be the period of doubling, still the num- bers of mankind would attain 50,000,000 in 345 years, and would reach 200,000,000 in 373 years from the flood. I think the former calculation the most probable ; but, even in the latter case, the number of mankind would have reached 200,000,000 in the twenty-fourth year of Abra- ham." What now becomes of Mr, Gliddon's state- ment, that according to "Archbishop Usher's Chronology," we are to " take note, that between Mizraim and Abraham we have to condense all the events into a space not exceeding 200 years;" and that "there could not have been 100,000 in- habitants on all the earth, according to any rea- sonable statistical calculation." ' Further remark on this subject would be superfluous. I hasten, therefore, to add, in regard to the above objec- tions, finally, that " it is not wonderful that idol- atry should have sprung up during the lives of Noah and Shem, when we consider the multi- » Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 44. tudes of mankind, and that after the dispersion they were widely scattered over the face of the earth. We know that the Israelites fell into idolatry even in the presence of the lixtly moun- tain, during the lifetime of Moses, and afterwards in the midst of the warning of the prophets. The influence of Arphaxad, and Salah, and Heher in Chaldea, would not be greater," in counteracting this growing evil, " than that of Moses and Elijah over the children of Israel. Besides, it is not aflSrmed in Scripture that all the patriarchs be- tween Arphaxad and Terah were holy men, and never deviated into idolatry." CHAPTER VI. On the predetermined period (6000 years) that was to intervene between the crea- TION AND Fall, and the close of "the TIMES OF THE GeNTILES." EXAMINATION OF Dr. Scyffarth's theory on this subject. With the facts before us, as set forth in the pre- ceding articles, we now address ourselves to a verification, in accordance with the shorter He- brew computations, of the first two of the three propositions, laid down in our introductory chap- ter, namely — I. That God, in his infinite wisdom, and for the promotion of His own glory and Man's great- est ultimate good, has assigned to the present con- stitution of things, in this world, a limited and definite duration ; and that, thrmigh the medium of " the times and seasons which lie has put in His own power," He has imparted a knowledge of the same to His people through His word. II. That this limited and definite duration of time, in the purpose of God, was to embrace the precise period of 6000 years, and to include the three dispensations. Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian, commericing from the creation and fall of man, and terminating with the cleie of the period called " the times of the Gentiles " SECTION I. Traditional and Scriptural Evidence of the above Theory. As in the matter of determining the question of an authoritative version between the claims of the Hebrew and Septuagint; so here, it is, funda- mental to a correct understanding of the subject 80 OUR BIBLE CHBONOLOGY CBITICALLy EXAMINED. in hand, that we show, by bcbipturb, that all God's purposes relatively to the world and the Church, as connected with the developments — together with the availahle means of grace and salvation under them — of the great plan and work of human Eedemption, were, in the purposes of God, to he limited to the precise period of 6000 years. True, the things which "the spirit of Christ that was in the old prophets," relating, as they did, not only to " the sufferings of Christ," but also to " the glory that should follow," reach beyond the close of this period. We are now, however, treating of the chronological data of Scripture, historic and historico-prophetic, as connected with the three dispensations. Pa- triarchal, Jewish, and Christian, in the abstract. The predicted events which follow those that terminate " the times of the Gentiles," at the end of the 6000th year from the creation and fall, relate, for the most part, to those whieh fill up a short UNCHRONOLOGiCAL interval thai is to elapse — a season of unparalleled tribulation, for which, see Dan. xii. 1, Mark xiii. 19, 20, and Luke xxi. 25, 28 — between the close of the 6000th year, and the final establishment of the millennial reign of Christ during the 7000th year of Sabbatic rest. See on this subject, Rev. xx. 1-6. It will also be incumbent on us to prove, in this connection, that the Scriptures contain the data requisite in these premises, not only; but also, manger the alleged intricacies and obscurity which attend it, that it is nevertheless fully within the scope of a definite and reliable adjustment. With this explanation in reference to the two above-named propositions, I now proceed to an exhibit of the evidence confirmatory of what we have assumed above, of the 6000 years. This evidence is of two kinds, Traditional and Scrip- tural. I. Traditional. Take, on this subject, the following, as expressive of the opinions of the writers of the Jewish pre-Christian Church. Thus, the seventh day's Sabbatism of rest after the six days of creation, they interpreted as typical of Messiah's kingdom of blessedness during the seventh or millennial age of the world. So the Rabbi Eliezer — " The blessed Lord created seven worlds (i. e., actovag, ages), but one of them is all Sabbath, and rest in life eternal.'" So also > Eab. Eliez., chap, xviii. p. 41. Eeferring to this pas- sage, Dr. Whitby, on Heb. iv. 9, says, " He refers to their (the Jews) common opinion, that the world should continue 6000 years, and then a perpetual [millennial V] Sabbath begins, typified by God's resting the seventh day, and blessing it." Rabbi Katina, as cited in the Gemara or gloss of their Talmud, said, " that the world continues 6000 years." To the same effect is the Bereshith Rabba, which says, " If we expound the seventh day of the 'ZOOOth of years, which is the world [age] to come, the exposition is, ' He blessed it,' because that in the YOOOth all souls shall be bound in the bundle of life. . . So our Rabbins of blessed memory have said, in their commentaries on ' God blessed the seventh day,' that the Holy Ghost blessed the world [age] to come, which beginneth the 7000th years," etc. So also Elias, supposed to be Elias the Tishbite, an eminent Rabbi that lived about 200 years b. c. ; who says that " the world should stand 6000 years ; 2000 void, 2000 under the law, and 2000 the days of the Messiah." He here speaks of the world under the present disadvantage of the Fall : and though no mention is made of the sev- enth millenary, yet it appeals from a foregomg place in the same German Talmudica, that Elias was of opinion that it answered to the Sabbath ; for he also " taught, that in the seventh millenary the earth would be renewed, and the righteous dead raised, no more again to be turned to dust," etc. The author of Cespeh Mishna, in his notes on Maimonides, is very particular, and expresses himself thus: "At the end of the world will be the day of judgment, and the resurrection of the dead, and after that the world to come. These things (adds he) are intimated to us by the six days' work ; upon the sixth day Adam was created, and perfected on the seventh, . . . which will be the Sabbath. This is the beginning of the world to come; and the Sabbatical year and the year of Jubilee intend the same thing." ' Rabbi Moses Bar Nachman observes, from a tradition of the ancient Jews, " that the present world will conclude with the days of the Messiah ; and that at the end of them will be the judgment and resurrection of the dead, which is the world to come." Here, by the days of the Messiah, he means the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah in the present world, under the last 2000 years of it ; . . . and that the world to colne, begins with the seventh millennium.* And, finally, though we might greatly enlarge these quotations, Philo is copious on this subject, stating that the Sab- baths of " the Law were allegories, or figurative expressions," denotive of the seventh great Sab- batism of lest. But we add to the above — > Hilk. Teshuvah, cap. 2. § 2. » In Torath Hadaam, u. 80. f. 105. Vid. Grellot in loo. p. 211, etc. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. That the same opinion prevailed among the Christian writers immediately following the Apos- tolic age. In the concluding chapter of the learned Elliott's " Horae Apocalypticae," that writer gives extensive extracts on this subject, fiom the writing-s of Barnabas, Irenseus, Justin Martyr, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Ambrose, from which I take the following, as sufficient to our purpose. St. Barnabas, of the first century, comments upon the words of Moses, Gen. ii. 1-3, thus : " This it signifies: that the Lord God will finish all things in 6000 years; for a day with him is as a thousand years, as he himself testifieth, saying — Behold, this day shall be a thousand years. There- fore, children," he adds, " in six days, that is, in oOOO years, shall all things be consummated." Lactantius says, "Because the works of God were finished in six days, it is necessary that the world should remain in this state six ages, that is, 6000 years." Cyprian, a. d. 252, says, that "in the creation of the world seven days were spent, and in those seven days 7000 years were figuratively included," the last of which is to be nnderstood of the millennial rest. And to the above, I add, that the testimony of Bishop Lati- mer, the eminent English reformer and martyr under the reign of the bloody Mary, may be quoted to the same end. In his notable sermon on " the Day of Judgment," he observes — " The world was ordained of God to endure, as Scripture and all learned men agree, 6000 years." To all this, however, it may be objected, that these were mere Jewish conceits, and hence are not to be received as entitled to a place in the scale of evidence in behalf of the matter in hand. But, before we can concede the justness of this imputation, it will be well to examine whether there is not in scripture a recognition of the principle of analogy on which the above opinions were founded : in other words, that the six first days of the world, and the Sabbath ensuing, were not designed to adumbrate the continuance of the Church for 6000 years, under the present constitution of things, and a seventh in the world to come. That it is so, we submit, may be made to appear from the fact — 1. That, as the divine Being, from his attribute of prescience, " declares the end from the begin- ning,"' there is certainly nothing incongruous to the supposition that he intended to make his fiist worKs a model or platform for all that should succeed — to render the natural or sensible world an emblem of the rational or intellectual ; and ' Isa. xlvj. 10. n that the first displays of his almighty power should exhibit in miniature, so to speak, the sev- eral grand events relating to the world and the Church, together with the several periods when they should transpire. Surely, such a view of God's design in his first creation is every way worthy of the divine Being, and every way suited to the glory of his unsearchable wisdom. Then consider further — 2. That the Scriptures exhibit the Church in the aspect of her analogy to a variety of simili- tudes and dispensations of Providence. Who does not know that Hagar, the servant of Sarah, and Sinai, a mountain in Arabia, were types of the legal institution? Again, is it not equally certain that Sarah, the wife of Abraham, and Sion, a mountain of Jerusalem, were typical of the Gospel state or covenant of grace ? ' Nay, we are told that the whole Levitical institution was made up of shadows, the substance of which is to be found in Christ only.' The same holds true of God's providences towards the Church. The bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and their deliverance therefrom, and the Babylonish cap- tivity of the Jews and their restoration, typify on the one hand the suflferings and bondage of the Church, under and during the long reign of Gen- tile anti-Christian dominancy over her, — and on which account this anti-Christian empire is called both Egypt^ and Babylon;* and on the other, the peace, prosperity, and glory that await her, when the Lord shall arise to shake terribly the earth," to lift up a standard against her enemies,' and to open a way for his ransomed people to enter Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads." ' I would add to the above, in con- clusion, on this subject — 3. That the frequent use of the number seven, in Scripture, it is conceded by all, gives to it the mystical character of an emblem or figure of per- fection. In the Old Testament, besides instances too numerous to recite, we read that the seventh day was holy, the seventh year was the year of rest, and seven times seven was the great Jubilee : So, the living creatures entered into the ark by sevens, while the first-born of every beast remained seven days with its dam, and the male children of Israel were to be seven days old before they were circumcised; also, the candlestick of the taber- nacle had seven lamps, and the unclean woman and those cured of leprosy, were to be purified ' Gal. iv. 24, etc. ' Col. ii. 17. * lb. xiv. 8 ; xvii. 5. «Ib. xlix. 22; IxiJ. 10. = Eev. xi. 8. 6 Isa. ii. 19—21. 'lb. XXXV. 10. 8.2 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. for seven days, etc. etc. And when we turn to tlie New Testament, especially to that eminently symbolic book, the Apocalypse, we shall find the use of it almost as common. We there read of seven Churches, seven stars, seven candlesticks, seven lamps, seven eyes, seven- horns of the lamb, seven seals, seven plagues, seven trumpets, seven thunders, and seven vials. These considerations, therefore, with deference It is submitted, more than exonerate the pre- Christian Jewish, and with them the early post- Christian Church, from indulgence in mere fanci- ful conceits as to their views of the typical intent of the six days of creation and a seventh of rest. Not that we would claim the character of abso- lute proof in authorities that are only traditional ; or that all the opinions expressed are in perfect accordance with the things represented when viewed in detail : yet, while we reflect, in behalf of the ^re-Christian Jewish writers, that they flourished, at least for the most part, during a comparatively pure state of the Church ; and also, that the early ^o«i-Christian Fathers, with the additional light of the teachings of Christ and the writings of the Apostles before them, still continued to put forth the same sentiments, — and that, mark, not as mere opinions, but as an article of their Christian faith ; — I say, with these facts present to our minds, without claiming in behalf either of the one or the other that they were infallible, who can doubt that, in the wisdom and purpose of the divine Architect of the universe and the great Head of the Church, the first six days of creation and the seventh of rest were designed to typically adumbrate the 6000 years of Christ's mediatorial work under the three dispensations. Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian, and of a seventh millenary of triumph over his enemies, and of rest, and peace, and joy, and blessedness with his redeemed people, in millennial glory ? But, in connection with the traditional, I must contend — II. That the scriptures are not entirely silent, as to an evidently direct recognition of the above principle of analogy in these premises. For example : I ask, was not Adam, who as the first man was of the earth earthy,' created as "the figure of Him (Christ) that was to come ?" " If, then, we can go back to the fountain-head of time, and find in Adam a type of " the second man, the Lord from heaven,'" as he who, by a SECOND CREATION was to " Tcstore all things" from the ruins of the fall; why should it be « 1 Cor. XV. 47. /> Eom. v. 14. = 1 Cor. XV. 47. thought a thing incredible, that the six days of formation of the material heavens and eai th, and a seventh of rest, should also bear a like charac- ter ? Wherefore did God create the world in six days and rest on the seventh ? Why did he not employ five, eight, ten, or twelve days instead? And so accordingly St. Paul (Col. ii. 16, 17), alluding to the typical character of the preceding dispensations, speaks especially " in respect of the Sabbath days" — of which, the seventh day of the Creator's repose from his six days' work was the first, — and denominates them " a shadow of good things to corned Or, if this be deemed by any an unwarrantable stretching of types, in regard to the first Sabbath, I would direct the reader to Paul's use of the word IiaPPaTtafjtos — Sabbatism — in Heb. iv. 9 ; where, especially con- sidering that it was JSebrew Christians whom he was addressing, and that, from long-continued usage, they could not do otherwise than associate it with a Chronological Septenary, he employed it to designate the saints long-expected and ar- dently prayed for glorious time of rest with Christ. If, therefore, as is undeniable, the inspired Apos- tle applied the seventh day or first Sabbath of creation as a type . of the heavenly rest, how can we consistently withhold from the previous six days of creative labor, a similar typical character, as denotive of the 6000 years' work of the New Creation to be effected by that antitypal " second Adam," with whom " one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." SECTION II. Additional evidence from Scripture, of the above theory, on the basis of its Chronological Epochs. — Examination of Dr. ScyffartKs work on this subject. But, the direct Scriptural evidence on this subject still remains to be adduced. Not that we pretend that there is an explicit declaration of Holy Writ on this subject. So far from it, we concede that, instead of such an explicit state- ment, " The Father" in his infinite wisdom has been pleased, in the first place, as we have shown in extenso^ to permit various corruptions of the original Hebrew numbers, and especially by the sev- enty Greek translators ; and also, in the next place, ' Sco pages 54^ "VG, and also 40-46, of this work. 2 Pet. iii. 8. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. even in regard to the chronology of the Hebrew version, so to overrule the arrangement of the sacred historic narrative, on the one liand, and to shroud the prophetic numbers in mystical foi'ms, on the other, as to "put the times and seasons in his own power" during the good pleasure of his will. In this way it will be perceived that, while in regard to the permitted prevalence and use of the chronologically corrupted Septuagint in the time of Christ, the Divine purposes in reference to the fwo advents of Messiah — the Jirst in his suffering humanity as an expiatory sacrifice for sin, and the second, in his glorified humanity as a triumphant king, as set forth in that version — were so far veiled in obscurity, as to secure the accomplishment of both in the order of time assigned to them ; so, in respect to the true Hebrew chronology — which immediately after the crucifixion took the place among the Jews of the discarded Septuagint, — while it left them vcithout excuse for their acts of having first rejected, and then murdered God's dear Son, it furnished demon- strable evidence that the first advent of Jesus transpired at the exact '^fulness of time" pre- scribed therein, that is, " in the midst" of the last of Daniel's "seventy weeks" (chap. ix. 24-27), being coincident with a. m. 4165 and 4166.* And so also, in reference to the prolonged interval that was to elapse thenceforward between the two advents, as will be seen when we come to treat of the prophetic numbers, — though "the Lion of the tribe of Judah" (in the " revelation" which " the Father gave unto him," and which " he sent and signified by his angel unto his ser- vant John" ' on the isle of Patmos, a. d. 96) has "prevailed to open the long-closed book" of Daniel's Visions,"' and to unloose the seals thereof;'' yet these "revelations," as well in re- spect to chronology as to the events portrayed therein, being communicated under symbolico- mystical forms, still invested them with so much of obscurity, as to reserve their full development to that period called "the time of the end."' " The vision is for an appointed time," which " appointed time, was long ;" ' " but at the end it shall speak, and not lie," ' etc. We belijeve that we have reached " the time of the end," and hence that, in its most literal and emphatic sense, we of this generation are those "upon whom the ends of the world [aZwvwv, age] arexome."' ■ See Chronological Tables at the end of this volume ; also, pp. 5i-56. " Kev. i. 1. " Dan. xii. 4r-9. * Rev. v. 1-9. ' Dan. xii. 4-9. «lb. X. 1. 'Amosiii.?. » 2 Cor. x. 11. If, then, the chronology of the Scriptures, as embraced in the two golden chains of measure- ment — I mean the consecutive links in the his- toric chain, and the mystical numbers in the prophetic — starting from a given and well-defined point in sacred history, are found upon exami- nation exactly to fill up, like landmarks in the highway, and shadows upon the dial-plate of time, the precise period of 6000 yeai's from the creation and Fall to the close of "the times of the Gentiles,'' it will follow inevitably — First, That all God's purposes, as connected with the availability of the ordinary means of grace and salvation to man, will have been fully accomplished within that period. And, second. That if "our chronology" be demonstrated as true, it will show the exact proximate position, as to time, of the world and the Church to the close of this dispensation. Before passing on, however, it will be as well in this place to notice the only objection to the above which is at all entitled to our regard. Dr. Scyflfarth, in his " Summary of Eecent Discoveries of Biblical Chronology," etc., speaking of the original promise of Messiah as founded on the words, "ii shall bruisi thy head,"^ etc., says — " Through Noah was handed down those revela- tions respecting his advent, which led all the na- tions of antiquity to "expect a Saviour in the course of the sixth millennium after the crea- tion." ' Also, that " the prophets of the Old Tes- tament foretold repeatedly that Christ would come into the world 6000 years after the cre- ation ;" ' and especially that Isaiah predicted "the Messiah's advent iu 'the last days'* [time]. That is, as the six days of creation were followed by the Sabbath, so would the Christian Sabbath — the Sabbath of the Christian dispensation — be preceded by six days, each consisting of a thou- sand years ; a statement perfectly consistent with prophetic usage," ° etc. Also, that in " Gen. ii. 2, and Exod. xxxi. 13, all interpreters found the prophecy that Christ would be born at the ex- piration of the sixth year-thousand, as is testified by learned Mohammedans. For Abulfeda says, ' The Pentateuch and other Hebrew boohs had promised that the Messiah should come during the sixth millennium (year-thousand) after the creation.' Abulfanag says : ' As had been fore- told in the law and the prophets, the Messiah was to be sent in the last time, at the end of the sixth year-thousand after the creation.' ' Accordingly, 1 Gen. iii. 15. = Summary, etc., p. 61. = lb. p. 62. * Isa. ii. 2. ' Summary, etc., p. 133. " lb. p. 134. Si OUR BIRLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. he observes, ' Suetonius and Tacitus relate that the east was looking for the promised Messiah.' When? Why, in a. d. 70, at which time the sixth millennium was to end /" ' It is, however, to be particularly observed in this connection, that the le;ii ned doctor speaks of an advent of the Messiah as having taken place in A. D. 130. His object is, to prove the fallacy of the Hebrew chronology in reference to that event. He says : " We derive further confirma- tion of the chronology of the Septuagint from the primitive Christian Cliurches belonging to the apostolic age. For during the time of the Apostles and the age immediately succeeding, the Christians expected the beginning of the great Sabbath, the seventh year-thousand after the creation, which," he affirms, " began in the year 130 A. c, and expired in 1130." Of course, as the interval between a. d. 130 and 1130 is ex- actly 1000 years, this writer can refer to no other period than that of Messiah's millennial reign with his saints, as described Rev. xx. 1-6. We respectfully leave the learned doctor, there- fore, to a choice of one of two horns of the fol- lowing dilemma : Either to allow of only sixty years interval between Christ's first advent in A. D. 70, and his second in A. d. 130 ; or to assert that there was to be but one advent ! If he adopts the first alternative above, then, instead of Christ's having come to save, he came to destroy men's lives ; * as, in a. d. 70, the burning of the Holy City, the massacre of millions of Jews, and the captivity of many thousands, were the events which must have signahzed his first advent ! Be- sides, sixty years interval between the first and second advents can scarcely be reconciled with our Lord's prediction of the pi-olonged- ca^iW\tj and oppression which was to be the portion of those of the Jewish nation who escaped death at the destruction of their city by Titus. For, our blessed Lord having, in Matt, xxiii. 34-39, spoken of that persecution which his followers should sufi'er at the hands of the Jews, after his cruci- fixion — and also uttered the prediction against the Jewish nation, " Behold, your house is left unto you desolate" — he proceeds to designate the length of that interval, as set forth in Luke xxi. 24 : " And ye shall be led captive into all nations, and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gen- tiles, UNTIL THE TIMES OF THE GeNTILES BE FQL- FiLLED ;" when, immediately after " the expiration of the short unchronological unparalleled tribu- lation that is to follow, the second advent of Mes- ' Sammury, etc. p. 184. ' Luko ix, 56. siah in the clouds of heaven is to transpire,^' when they (the Jews) shall say, " Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the -Lord." ' If his choice is the second alternative, then — as Christ came in a. d. 130, not that he might, according to the prophecy of Daniel (ix. 24-27), " be cut ofi'," " to make ain end of sin, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness'' for a guilty and lost world, but to commence his millennial reign of a thousand years — it follows, that the world is left without the benefits of a sin-atoning sacrifice ! That this latter is the doctor's choice, necessarily results from his making the Messiah's advent in a. d. 70, and that in a. d. 130, occur at precisely the same juncture, viz. — at the close of the sixth, and opening of tlie seventh, year-thousand from the creation, as may be seen from the following comparison of Dr. Scyffarth with himself. "The Jews knew, aooord- iug to the predictions of the prophets, the advent of Mes- siah was to occur six thou- sand years after the creation ; and that, moreover, the sixth millennium or year-thous- and was to end 70 year.i sub- sequent to the commence- ment of our era," etc. (p. 184). " Would the primitive Christian Chnrclies have openly spoken of the begin- ning of the seventh year-thou- sand as then expected" (that is, the "seventh mil- lennium," whicli was to legim, A. D. ISO, and to end a. d. 1180), "if they had not learn- ed from the Apostles and Fathers of the Church, or directly from the Bible itself, that the 6000 years subse- quent to the creation would tlien have elapsed ?" etc. (p. 136). Reserving for a future page what we have to ofier in explanation of the circumstances which led the Jews to the rejection and crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ, on the one hand, and those which occasioned, on the part of the New Testament saints and the early post-Christian Fathers, the expected second advent after a short interval, on the other ; I would only say, that we deem it worse than a waste of time and space, after what has been already oflfered on that sub- ject,* further to refute such chronological state- ments as the following, for instance : — that " the midst of the years" spoken of by the prophet Habakkuk (chap. iii. 2), refers to " the half or middle of the world period of 12000 years," etc., of the "Era of the Chaldeans, the Persians in Haenza of Ispahan, in the Zendavesta, among > Compare Matt. xxiv. 29-81 ; Mark xiii. 24-27 ; Luka xxi. 25-27. ' See pp. 54-56 of this work. OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINEE. 85 the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Tuscans, and others.'" Also, that "all those and the other astronomical observations of the ancient world" [that is, the " autoptical observations of the starry heavens"], " which mutually confirm each other, concur in demonstrating with mathematical cer- tainty that between Adam and Christ, not 4000, but 6000 years elapsed."' Or, should any be found to take exception to this summary disposal of the matter in hand, we would respectfully call upon them to reconcile, as best they can, the doctor's alleged astronomically mathematical demonstration of the period from the Creation to the Nativity, at 5871 years; with his repeated declarations, as based upon the united testimony of all the nations of antiquity. Pagan, Jewish, and Christian, that the advent of Christ was to take place at the close of the sixth and heginning of the seventh year-thousand from the Creation. I submit, that the difference of 129 years, in so important a matter, comes rather wide the mark of astronomically " mathematical certainty 1" One other preliminary, ere we pass to an exhibit, in detail, of the historic links of " Our Bible Chronology." In our introductory re- marks, it was observed, in reference to the divis- ion of the earth among the nations descended of Japheth, Shem, and Ham, that, while the historic records of the Scriptures were but a narrative of the wonderful dispensations of Heaven, first and principally towards the great Sbmitic race, having Canaan, Palestine, or the Holy Land, as the territorial centre of their operations ; and second, subordinately, of those outside the great Semitic family, particularly those of the four principal empires of antiquity, the Babylonian, Medo-Per- sian, Grecian, and Roman, on the one hand ; the prophetic portions of Holy Writ clearly reveal, that the "Lord" (having selected a "people" as his " portion'' fi-om the Semitic branch, and con- stituted " Jacob as the lot of his inheritance" ' of whom it was declared, " Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the na- tions'^) purposed to constitute them as the depos- itory of " the lively oracles to give unto us," and to make Canaan, from first to last, through them, the theatre for the unfolding and consummation of man's redemption from sin, on the other.* I must now remind the reader of another remark, made in reference to the leading object of the two septuagintarians. Dr. Scyffarth and Mr. Gliddon, in opposing the chronology of the He- 1 Sammary, etc., p. 188. " lb. p. 157. » Dout. xxxii. 7-9. * See pp. 18, 14 of this work. brew version. This is, as we believe, to rob the Jew of his ardently cherished hope of the coming of his Messiah, together with the numerous assu- rances of the national restoration and pre-eminence among the nations, in Palestine, of his long down-trodden race, as set forth by the prophets both of the Old and New Testaments.' Of the former writer (Dr. Scyfiarth), we leave the impartial reader to decide whether, accord- ing to his theory as above exhibited, there is any door of hope left to the Jew, that his Messiah will yet come and " restore the kingdom to Is- rael." And, in regard to. Mr. Gliddon, with a view to secure to his alleged Japhetic race a pre- eminence in Canaan over those of the Semitic, Hebrew, or Jewish, he thus disposes of them : We learn from Genesis x. 21, that Japheth was the elder of Noah's children. The exact meaning of Japheth, according to Dr. Lamb, is " the man of the opening of the tent." Now in ch. ix., the 2'7th verse, we read, "God shall en- large Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem." But a more appropriate translation of the Hebrew text is, "God shall open wide the door of the tabernacle to the descendants of Ja- pheth, and they shall dwell in the tabernacles of the children of Shem." Whereby we perceive a remarkable prophecy, of the call of the Gentiles to the rights and privileges of the Jewish Church, many ages prior to the birth of Abraham ; and one that is rapidly drawing to fulfilment through- out the East, in a political point of view, if " coming events cast their shadows before." Those who are really acquainted with what the East is, are persuaded, with respect to the Holy Land itself, that the Jews, as a nation, have forfeited all right to the possession ofit; that God has totally, perhaps finally, deprived them of it ; and physi- cally disqualified them, as a nation, from its fu- ture independent occupation. " It has for cen- turies been trodden of the Gentiles. No people liave been able to establish themselves securely for any length of time within its precincts ; nor will any, until it may please God to grant it to that nation, or to that family, whom he may choose," — which, if organic laws have any effect on our social constitution, will be to the conquer- ing hand of the " Audax genus Japethi" — the bold race of Japheth. Many pious Christians and orthodox tlivines consider the promises of the restoration of the Jews to be of a spiritual, and not of a temporal nature. ' See p. 66 of tbia work. 86 OUR BIBLE CHBONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. Aye, "the promises of the restoration of the Jews, to be of a spiritual, and not of a temporal nature :" as though — if, perchance, they should be finally restored to their own land — it were impossible that, along with the " temporal," they should also be made partakers of the " spiritual," blessings of God ! Now, though it does not fall within the design of the present work to enter into an exposure at length, of the fallacy of the above article ; yet — inasmuch as, by all classes of these writers, it is based on the hypothesis that the Jewish restora- tion from the Babylonish captivity, and their sub- sequent occupancy of Canaan, etc., meet all the circumstances of that event as set forth by their own prophets — we would beg simply to sulimit the following marks, by which the reader may be able readily to distinguish the predictions which relate to Israel's future restoration, from those which were fulfilled in the return from Babylon in the days of Cyrus, Ezra, and Nehe- miab. 1. There are many passages which predict the restoration of all the tribes — of Israel, as well as of Judah — and the union of the whole in one nation, in their own land. At the return from Babylon it was but a few Jews, properly so called, who were restored. The ten tribes have never returned ; and the vast majority even of the Jews remained in the places where they had been carried captive. All predictions, therefore, of a universal restoration, must yet remain to be fulfilled. 2. One passage at least, Isa. xi. 11, speaks of a " second" restoration of Israel. This could not be the return from Babylon, which was but the first restoration. What other has there been since that time ? Must not then the second res- toration be one yet to come ? 3. Where miraculous events are foretold in connection with Israel's restoration, it must be a future one that is treated of. No such events attended the return from Babylon. 4. Where it is declared that the nation shall be converted as well as restored, there can be no question that the restoration is a future one. Were the Jews converted at the return from Babylon 3 5. Many passages declare, that after the nation of Israel is restored, they shall not fall- any more into sin, or see trouble any more. Can these passages apply to the return from Babylon ? Has not their great, their crowning sin, and have not their heaviest calamities, been subse- quent to that event ? 6. When the restoration of Israel is declared to be connected with the utter and final overthrow of those who have hated them and trodden them down, it must be a yet future restoration which is foretold. No such overthrow of all their ene- mies was connected with the return of the Jews from Babylon. 7. The prophecies of Israel's restoration which were written after the return from Babylon, cannot be in any way construed to refer to that event. Such are the predictions of Zechariah and Haggai ; and such also are those contained in the New Testament. 8. Those predictions of Israel's return which connect it with the coming of Christ, must refer to a yet future restoration. We all know that no restoration of Israel took place in connection with Christ's first coming ; and the return fiom Babylon was not connected with either his first coming or his second : and, finally — 9. Where Israel's restoration is associated in prophecy with the introduction of millennial blessedness, it must be obvious to all, that, so far from having been realized in the Jews' return from Babylon, or in Dr. Scyflfarth's so-called " Sabbath of the Christian dispensation," between A. D. 130 and 1130, it must necessarily be a future restoration that is foretold. Alas, it has never commenced even to this day ! ' SECTION III. Summary of the historic Chronological links, in their consecutive order, from the Creation and Fall, to the Nativity. — Groundlessness of the popular sentiment regarding the alleged diffi- culties of Sacred Chronology. In demonstrating the correctness of " Our Bible Chronology" as founded on the original Hebrew numbers, we set out under the conviction that all attempts to reach a satisfactory result would be vain, separate from a thorough exhibit of all those facts and circumstances, whether fundamental or collateral, which, down to the present day, have operated to perplex and em- barrass our inquiries into the true chronology of the world's history. Hence the appropriation of so large a portion of the present work to the settlement of the great question, as to which of the two extant versions of Holy Scripture, the Hebrew or the ' See on this, " Plain Piipors on Prophetic Subjects." London, 1854, p. 101, etucq. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLUGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 87 Greek Septuagint, is to be relied on as author- itative in the premises; and having, as we claim, placed this important matter beyond the reach of reasonable controversy, in favor of the Hebrew text ; without further recapitulation — the neces- sity for which is precluded by the contents in the fore-part of the volume, and the general Index — it only remains, in reference to the historic chain, that we furnish a summary of the chrono- logical links, in their consecutive order, from the Creation and Fall, to the Nativity. On this subject, the reader is referred to the Tabular Views of Sacred Chronology, inserted at the close of Part II. In addition to the variations between the He- brew and Septuagint versions, as exhibited in the Table, pages 11, 12, the historian Prideaux, in his " Sacred and Profane History Connected," points out numerous inaccuracies in such biblical chro- nologists as the great Jewish historian Josephus : e. g., in his 1st vol., pages 174, 382 ; vol. 2d, pages 65, 68, 305 ; vol. 3d, pages 58, 71, 135, 199, 207, 240, 241, 400, 401, 414, 416 ; and vol. 4th, page 58. Also, of the profoundly learned Archbishop Usher, vol. i., pages 430, 434 ; vol. ii., page 45 ; and vol. iii., page 206. Here, the inaccuracies of Josephus, who followed the Sep- tuagint, greatly predominate over those of Usher, who adopted the Hebrew. Now, from the /oci of these and the like inaccuracies by men so dis- tinguished for their learning, it is contended that it is not only impracticable, but impossible, to determine the true chronology of the Bible. For ourselves, however, when we consider on the one hand that the historic records of the Old Testament, in both versions, as the basis of chro- nology, are not given in their regular consecutive order, — and on the other, the indolence, the su- perstition, or at least the inadvertencies of those who have preceded us in this department of bib- lical literature, — our surprise is, that these inac- curacies are not greatly increased. They are not, however, without their use, serving us as beacon-lights, to warn us of the shoals and quick- sands on which others have foundered. All that is necessary is, that we account for their errors, recon- cile discrepancies, and then reduce all to an un- broken chronological chain, from the beginning. In regard to " our Bible chronology" (for which, see tabular views), the following will be sufficient to show the groundlessness of the popular senti- ment, that the difficulties in determining the true chronology of the Bible are insuperable. Take, for example, the following : 1. That, to all the most prominent events re- corded by the sacred penmen will be found appended the dates of their occurrence, the latter being added with a view to authenticate the whole as an inspired narrative. 2. That, in the entire chronological chain, reaching from a. m. 1 to a.d. 37 — at which point the regular consecutive chronology in this de- partment, when properly adjusted, terminates — there are only 115 links. 3. That, of these 115 links, the Scriptural references of the book, chapter, and verse show that 95 of them rest upon the express authority of inspiration. 4. That, of the remainder, there are only two conjectural dates, which occur in the fourth period, in relation to the times of anarchy, and of Eli and Samuel, etc. ; but that these are sus- ceptible of such accurate adjustment, as to remove all doubt in regard to them. 5. That, in addition to the two above-named conjectural dates, there is to be found but one chronological discrepancy, that between the First Book of Kings, chap. vi. 1, and Acts xiii. 17-22 ; which discrepancy, however, can be satisfactorily accounted for by a comparison of the historical events of this period with the interval to which the above passages refer. And finally — 6. That, of the dates which occur in the sixth period, from Ezra to the Nativity, though given for the most part on the authority of the learned Dean Prideaux, they are overlaid by, and shown to be in harmony with, the inspired prophecy of the " seventy weeks" of Daniel, chap. ix. 24-27 SECTION IV. Admitted errors of the Septuagint Chronology, compared with those of the Hebrew. Let us now place in contrast with the above the admitted errors, etc., of the Septuagint chro- nology. 1. Of the antediluvian period, is the following in relation to Methuselah's age at the birth of Lamech, the Vatican edition of theLXX placing it at 167 years, and the Hebrew at 187, a diiFerence of 20 years. But, the Alexandrian and Aldine editions of the LXX, and also Josephus, accord with the Hebrew in making it 187 years. Me- thuselah therefore lived till the last year of this epoch, but died prior to the flood. 2. Of the 'postdiluvian age, the Alexandrian copies of the LXX omit the two years of the second period from the flood. Gen. xi. 10. Some attempt 88 OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. to account for it by supposing either that Deme- trius (who lived at Alexandria about b. c. 220, being near half a century after the time of the LXX') calculated from the birth of Arphaxad, two years after the flood, or that the 2 has dropped from his text or that of Eusebius. It is most probable, however, that it was omitted by the LXX themselves, as Demetrius had access to the ori- ginal autograph, deposited in the city library.' 3. The next date relates to the introduction into the Septuagint of the second Cainan, to whom is given 130 years. On this subject, mod- ern Septuagintarians disagree among themselves, Mr. Cunninghame of Lainshaw, and Dr. Scyffarth, asserting its genuineness, mainly, if not solely, on the ground that it is quoted as authentic by St. Luke' (chap. iii. 36) ; while Mr. Gliddon as confidently affirms that, as "the Septuagint is not free from interpolation, being subject to the same casualties to which all books are liable," so, " the most remarkable is that of the second Cainan, between Arphaxad and Salah, of 130 years :" which " spurious personage," he says, " was introduced into the Septuagint about the time of Demetrius, 220 years b. c," etc.* And, it is indisputable that the ancients — Josephus, Clemens, Theophilus, Julius Africanus, Eusebius, and indeed all the early chronographers down to the time of Constantine — united in rejecting the secoud Cainan as spurious. And so Dr. Hales, who stands at the head of the modern Septuagin- tarian school, on the ground, principally, that this personage is omitted in 1 Chron. i. 24 of that version, pronounced it an unwarrantable interpo- lation. Still, Mr. Cunninghame urges, that " if St. Luke's Gospel is a part of the inspired word of God, all their arguments cannot impugn the authority of the evangelist," who " copied the generations from that version." " In replying to this objection, we are led to notice — 4. The discrepancy between 1 Kings vi. 1, as adopted entire by the LXX from the original Hebrew, and Acts xiii. 17-22. St. Paul, it will be admitted, was equally inspired with St. Luke : and yet, with the same Septuagint version before him, in giving the chronology of the LXX as con- tained in 1 Kings vi. 1 of 480 years as the in- terval between the Exode and the 4th year of 1 See Hales, vol. i. p. 289. Dr. Kassell's Connect., vol. i. p. 68. ' See Cunninghame's Chron. of Israel and the Jews, Pref., pp. vi. vii. s Chron. of Israel, etc., p. 110; and Summary, etc., pp. 127, 128, and 181, 182. « Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 86. « Chron. of Israel, etc., pp. 110, 111. See note. Solomon; Mr. C, comparing it with the apos- tle's dates of the same period. Acts xiii. 17-22, says it is " less than the truth, if St. Paul was inspired of Ood, 131 years !" Quere, therefore — If the Septuagint was in error in this latter case, why not in the former ? In either case, so far as we can discern, even admitting that the one was an interpolation, and the other a discrepancy, it no more impugns the " inspiration" of St. Luke in quoting the one, than that of St. Paul in correcting the other. St. Luke, we are not to forget, was a Gentile. His Gospel was written in Greek, and/o- the Gentiles. Hence, his design in his 3d chapter being, not so much to give the genealogy of Christ as of the seed of Abraham in whom the Jews trusted, as of the seed of the woman in whom the Gentiles were also to hope for salvation;' he simply quoted from the Sep- tuagint, then in general use, as the accredited " inspired'^ word of God. On the other hand, St. Paul, who was " an Hebrew of the Hebrews" and who without doubt had a copy of the original Hebrew version at his command, was enabled, from his familiarity with the details of the chro- nology of the period in question, to detect and correct the error of 1 Kings vi. 1, as it then (as now) stood in that copy ; an error, doubtless, not of design, but of the inadvertency of an early transcriber, in substituting the numerical ■:; daleth, 4, in the place of i1 hay, 5, which, from the evi- dent similarity in the construction of each, might easily be done. SECTION V. Rule for the computation of the years of the gener- ations, administrations, reigns, etc., which form the basis of Scripture Chronology. It is necessary here to note, as a preliminary to what we have to offer on the chronology of the Old Testament, that we must determine upon what principles the years of the generations, and the administrations and reigns, which form the basis of the Scriptural chronology, are computed ; that is, whether in current or complete time. Bearing in mind then, in the first place, that the chronology of the Old Testament is carried on through the lines of the Sethite and Semitic patriarchs, together with the rulers of'the Church, till the rise of the four Gentile monarchies, and thence through the tribe of Judah ; the chronology of the kings of Israel was adjusted to that of the ' See Eohard's Eocles. Hist, etc., vol. i. p. 881. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 89 kings of Judah, simply with a view to point out the relations of the former with the latter, and to throw mutual light upon the histories of both branches of the family of Abraham. As to the Scriptural mode of computing time, we observe, that when it related to the reigns of individual kings, it was reckoned as current time. Thus, for example: In 2 Kings xxiv. 18, com- pared with Jer. xxix. 2, we learn that " in the 11th year of Zedekiah, in the 4th month, and the 9th day of the month, the city was broken up," etc., where the period of his reign is com- puted in current time. But, there must also have been some principle whereby a series of reigns were equalized with complete years ; other- wise there would be no well-defined chronology in the Scriptures. All would be doubt and un- certainty, and the very purpose for which the chronology was given, would be defeated. Ee- course was therefore had to the reckoning of each king's reign, etc., from the first of Nisan ; so that a king who reigned 10 years and 6 months, was computed to have reigned the whole of the 1 1th year, and his reign was therefore recorded as 1 1 years of complete time. This was in accordance with the practice of the Jews, as well in their popular and current scheme of chronology as in the writings of their learned men, — Josephus for instance, who always calculated the series of the generations and administrations in the Scriptures 9S being in complete time. St. Paul, in the syn- agogue of Antioch, adopted the same principle, &.cts xiii. 20, where his period of 450 years, as we shall show in its proper place, comes out with the greatest exactness.' SECTION VI. Notes on the details of our Chronology. We proceed now to an exhibit of the details of "Our Bible Chronologt." The sacred stream takes its rise with the first man, Adam, runs through the generations of the antediluvian patriarchs, as given in the Book of Genesis," and proceeds without interruption through the Pen- tateuch and Book of Joshua, to the division of the lands in the fifth year after the entrance into Canaan.' It will come in place, as we advance, to explain the matters indicated in the Notes 1, 2, 3, etc., > See on this subject, Cunninghame's Chron. of Israel, Pref., pp. ix-xii. 2 See Tabular Views, Period I. ' ib. Period IV. 12 interspersed through the different Periods of the Tabular Views. Note 1. — This relates to the Hebrews, Period II. We can see no reason for a doubt that they derived this designation from Eher or Heber, the son of Salah and grandson of Shem. The pro- phetic benediction, " Blessed he the Lord Ood of Shem" contains a clear intimation of the Divine purpose, at an early "period, to appropriate a name to that Semitic line who were to constitute the ancestors of the promised Messiah according to the flesh. And though Abraham is not " called a Hebrew till he had passed the Euphrates to the westward," we cannot, I think, infer that his pro- genitors, from the time of Heber, were not known by that title. The very form in which this appel- lation occurs in connection with Abraham, Gen. xiv. 13, as naturally supposes that his ancestors were Hebrews, as were those of St. Paul in claim- ing it, Philipp. iii. 5. Note 2. — In reference to the confusion of tongues and the dispersion in the days of Peleg (Phaleg), see pages 18-19, second article. Notes 3 and 4. — Taking the names of the re- spective founders of the three most ancient nations of antiquity, outside of the great Semitic family, as they occur in Gen. x., that of Mizraim or Menes (v. 6), as the founder of Egypt, stands first ; then Nimrod (vers. 8-10), who founded the Babylo- nian empire; and lastly, Ashur (vers. 10, 11, 22), founder of the Assyrian. Hence the order in which they are arranged in the Tabular Views, though the Babylonians seem to have figured in history prior to the Egyptians.' It is also to be recollected that the Canaanites occupied the country which bears their name prior to Mizraim's emigration to Egypt : " Now Hebron (in Canaan) was built seven years before Zoar in Egypt." ' Note 5. — Terah. Gen. xi. 20 apparently makes Abraham the eldest son of Terah ; but verse 29 shows that Haran was the eldest — his brother Nahor having married his (i. e. Haran's) sister Milcah. Then, as Terah was 70 years old at the birth of Haran (verse 26), if we allow an average of 20 years between the birth of each son, he was 130 years old when Abram was born, who was 75 when he left Haran, at the death of his father — agreeably to the divine command, ^re- viously given. Gen. xii. 4 — and " went forth to go into the land of Canaan." (Compare Gen. xi. 32, with chap. xii. 5.) Note 6. — Egyptian Dates. In their notation of time (besides the Astronomical Cycles and > See p. 86. ' Numb. xiii. 90 OUR BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. ■perpetual Calendar — tliat is, their "autoptical" or star-gazing " observations of the starry heav- ens" — the Egyptians regulated their ordinarv dates by the reign of each Pharaoh ; reckoning trom tne date of his accession to the throne to the day of his death. As in England, tlie 5th year of Vic- toria, or in France, the 12th of Louis Philippe; so in Egypt an act was chronicled " in the 4th year of the Pharaoh Shishonk, the 10th day of the month Paopi." ' JVote 7. — The chronology of Joseph is as fol- lows : His age when sold, Gen. xsxvii. 2, was 17 years. Stood before Pharaoh when 80, Oen. xli. 46. 13 " Tears of plenty. Gen. xli. 26 T " " " famine, Gen. xliii. 1 and xlvi 3 " Total, on Jacob's arrival in Egypt, *. m. 2298. 89 " Deducting this 39 years from 110, the age of Joseph at his death (Gen. 1. 22), proves thkt he was 11 years in Egypt after Jacob's arrival in the second year of the famine. The remaining 144 of the 215 years of the sojourn of the Israelites down to the exodus is : 1st Yeats of servitude to the birth of Moses. 64 years. 2(1 Ageof Mosesattime of Exode (Ex. vii. 7.)..80 " Sd. Add Joseph's time in Egypt aa above 71 " Total 215 " 4th. Add previous sojourn 215 " Whole period of sojoorn and bondage 430 " JVote 8. — ^The chronology of the Spies. That the spies were sent out from Kadesh-Barnea in the first year after the exode is proved from Numb, xiv. 33, where it is recorded that, on account of the evil report made by them, the Israelites were doomed to wander in the wilderness for 40 years. JVoies 9 and 10. — The above shows the period of the wanderings to have been exactly 40 years. Much time and labor have been expended, how- ever, in the settlement of the question as to the interval that elapsed between the entrance into Canaan and the division of the conquered country among the twleve tribes. All that is necessary to an understanding of the matter is the following. Caleb was 40 years old when sent out with the spies (Josh. xiv. 7), and 85 when the land was divided (Josh. xiv. 10) ; hence, that division was eflFected five years after their first occupancy of it, in Caleb's 85th year. Compare the references above. JVote 11. — Period of Joshua after the division of the land. As Joshua's age at his death was 110 years (Josh. xxiv. 29), he must have survived the dividing of the land 25 years. ' Anc. Egypt, etc., p. 25. JVotes 12, 13, 14.— It is within this Period IV of the chronology of the Old Testament, that we meet with the principal difficulties to be encoun- tered in Its adjustment. It relates to the discrep- ancy between the dates of 1 Kings vi. 1 and those of Acts xiii. 17-22, in reference to the interval from the exode to the fourth year of Solomon. Then, further, connected with this chronological discrepancy are two breaks, or chasms ; — the first, the Interregnum, or time of anarchy of Israel, between the death of Joshua and the first servi- tude, in regard to which the Scriptures are entirely silent ; and the second, the administrations of Eli, Samuel, Samson, and Saul, the dates of which are not defined in the Old Testament. It is hence, taken as a whole, the Great Chronological GoRDiAN Knot, which, till within a few years last past, has baffled the skill of many a master in Israel, who, failing to untie it — like the knot in the harness of the Phrygian king Gordius at the hand of Alexander — have attempted to cut it asunder. This process, however, in view of the important issue involved — that of a diflference of over 100 years in the current chronology of our English version as to the true date of tihe Na- tivity — will not do. The two chasms must be bridged over, and the discrepancy which over- leaps the whole period as given in 1 Kings vi. 1. and Acts xiii. 17-22, must be accounted for, and the true period determined from reliable data. I shall first place the two above named passages in opposite columns : 1 Kings vi. 1. "And it came to pass, in the /our hundred and dghUeCh year after the chil- dren of Israel were come (mt of the land of .Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the mouth of Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord." Acts Jdii. 17-22. " The God of this people of Israel chose our 'fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with a high arm hrought he them out of it. And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wil- derness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he divided their land to them iy lot. And after that, he gave to them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, un- til Samuel the prophet. And afterward they desired a king ; and God gave to them Saul, the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, hy the space of forty years. And when he had removed him, he raised up David unto them to be their king," etc. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 91 The first point of remark in reference to these passages relates to the occasion of the discrepancy under consideration. Of this we have already spoken in a preceeding page (see page 88), and have ascribed it, not to design, but to the careless- ness of some early transcriber in substituting the Hebrew numeral t daleih, 4, for that of tl hay, 5, which, from their similarity in form, might easily be done. In this erroneous form it was copied en- tire into the Septuagint by the seventy translators, ■who, unlike St. Paul, as we shall show, failed to detect the error by a careful examination of the chronological details of that period. The Septu- agintarians of the present day contend that " the Samaritan Pentateuch was, at first, an exact trans- cript of the original Law^^ not only ; but, that the LXX rendered the Hebrew Scriptures, in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus {at that time un- mutilated), into Greek," etc.*^ But, seemingly unconsciou*of the inconsistency into which that admission involves them, they aflBrm, at the same time, that the above error (with all others wherein the Hebrew now difi'ers from the Greek) is a cor- ruption of the original Hebrew by the Jews in t^e second century after Christ.^ How then comes it to pass, I would a-sk, if the Hebrew Scriptures were " unmutilated" when first trans- lated by the LXX, that 1 Kings vi. 1, which was copied entire, and which has always been retained in that version, could have been a cor- ruption by the Jews in the second century after Christ? We leave it for others to account for the fact, that while the LXX, as we have proved, corrupted the original Hebrew text by an enlargement of the epochs of the antediluvian and postdiluvian patriarchs, they failed to discover the true chrono- logical links which, as we shall presently show, prove the correctness of St. Paul's extended chro- nology of that period. To our mind it argues, at least, the absence of that vigilantcare and thorough accuracy of translation and transcription, on their part, which the very nature of their work imper- atively demanded. This premised, I remark — 1. That it is utterly impossible to reconcile the statements of 1 Kings vi. 1 and Acts xiii. 17-22, by recourse to the marginal dates of our present English version, as sanctioned by act of Parlia- ment on the authority of Archbishop Usher. A few examples will be sufficient to exhibit the per- » Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 86. » lb. p. 84, and Scyflfarth's " Summary," etc., pp. 114, 115, 119. feet babel of confusion into which these dates involve us in reference to this important pe- riod. It will be found that the 18 years of servitude under the Philistines and Ammonites, from which Jephthah delivered Israel, is made to commence in the year b. c. 1161 ; and the 40 years' servitude, in the time of Samson, is placed in the very same year, 1161. Again, the birth of Samuel is placed in the year b. c. ll'Zl, and that of Samson in 1161, only 10 years later. The administration of Eli is placed from the year b. c. 1171 to 1141, when the ark is captured and Eli dies. The administration of Jephthah is placed between b. c. 1143 and 1137, partly contemporaneous with that of Samuel and also of Eli, and partly after the death of Eli. The administration of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, are placed between the years B. c. 1137 and 1112, contemporaneous with and after that of Samson, and contemporaneous with Samuel. Further, the marriage of Samson is placed in the very same year with the capture of the ark and the death of Eli, namely, in the year b. c. 1141, and he is made to judge Israel to the year b. c. 1120, i. e., during the very time of the servitude, after the death of Eli ; and the death of Samson is placed in the same year (1120) that Samuel assembled the tribes of Israel at Mizpeh, and defeated the Philistines, etc. Now, these dates make the administrations of Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, and Samson, to have been posterior to that of Eli. But if so, how is it, we ask, that the Book of Judges, which cer- tainly, on the face of it, bears the aspect of being a history of Israel from the death of Joshua to that of Samson, is wholly silent as to the admin- istration of Eli, together with the remarkable circumstances of the capture of the ark ? Hence the necessity of turning from human computa- tions, though sanctioned by Act of Parliament, to the Sacred Kecord itself. I remark, therefore, in the next place — 2. That the entire interval between the Exode and the 4th year of Solomon, as inserted in the fourth period of our Tabular Views, is 587 years. But— 3. To prove the correctness of this aggregate number of years, we must harmonize the chro- nology of the interval between the division of the land, and the time of Samuel the prophet, with the 450 years of Acts xiii. 20 ; and also the whole period with the details of the history of those times. The following scheme, to be afterwards verified, is hereby given. 92 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Set down the whole period as above 5ST years. 1. Deduct ft'om this, the whole period of the servitudes, including the times of Eli and Samson Ill years. 2. Deduct the whole period of Judges, including SainuePs separate admin- istration 803 " 4U " Loaves 173 " S. Beduct for wanderings 40 " Division of lands 5 Joshua after that 25 " ^ 153 Saul 40 David 40 Solomon 8 This leaves for anarchy 20 Again : Set down whole period as above 5S7 1. Deduct Exode and Division of lands 45 yrs. 2. do. for Saul, David, and Solomon S3 " 128 Leaves 459 Here we have an excess of 9 years over the 450 of Acts xiii. 20. It is however to be borne in mind that the administration of Samuel as Judge, is not to be limited, as we shall show, to the 24 years as set down in the Table. This last-named date relates to his separate administration. Sam- uel was judge prior to this. The specified dates of this period, therefore, taken as a whole, deter- mine, as in the case of the 20 years of anarchy, that the 450 years down to the time of Samuel the prophet, makes his entire period as Judge to have been 33 years ; the first 9 of which were coetaneous with the last 9 years of Eli and Sam- son ; — which circumstance, it will be found, is perfectly consistent with the other parts of the sacred narrative concerning him. 4. It will be well here to advert to the abortive efforts of chronologists, ancient and modern, in their attempts to adjust the dates of this period ; regarding which, I observe — First : That while Dr. Hales and Dr. Russell, both advocates of the Septuagint version, admit that the number in 1 Kings vi. 1 is spurious ; Josephus, Dr. Hales, and Mr. Cunninghame pro- perly unite in fixing on the death of Joshua as the period for the commencement of the anarchy, which, they insist, was coetaneous with that of "the elders that overlived Joshua." Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, a. d. 330, and Mr. Cunning- hame follow Josephus, in assigning to the interval between the Exode and the foundation of the Temple in the fourth year of Solomon 612 years. I next observe — Second : In reference to the intermediate dates of this period, Josephus says (Antiq. vi. 5), BTiai Toig naai dwa Kai npog rovTOig oktu to nXrj&og avruv avapxia Kariaxs, — wherein he informs us, that " after the death of Joshua, for eighteen years in all, the multitude had no settled government, but were under an anarchy." This passage is rendered by Mr. Hudson, " for alto- gether ten years, Bind besides them eight, the people had no supreme magistrate." Julius Africanus inserted 30 years for the elders after the death of Joshua. Eusebius, for the same period gives 27 years for Joshua after the division of the land, and then passes to the first servitude, including in it the time of the elders, or anarchy. Clemens of Alexandria makes the period of the judges end with the death of Eli, and says that Saul reigned 9 years with Eli, and 18 with Samuel after the death of Eli. Also, that Samuel died 2 years before Saul, and that he "anointed him king who first reigned over Israel after the judges, of which the whole amount, reckoning to Samuel, is 463 years, 7 months." (See Stromata.) Theophilus (a. d. 330) gives for Joshua 27 years, and assigns to the whole peribd from the Exodus to the fourth year of Solomon, exactly 612 years.' And — The learned Abnl Pharaji, in his Historia Dy- nastiarum, p. 24, affirms that Joshua ruled 27 years, and that after him, Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, led the people, according to the opinion of Anianus, 24 years ; but he significantly adds, ^^ Scriptura autem sacra hand prcecise designat has annos" — " The Sacred Scripture does not, however, clearly designate these years." Among the moderns, Petavius gives to Joshua 14 years, and the elders 10." Dr. Hales, on the basis of Josephus, maintains that the interval between the death of Moses and that of Joshua is 26 years, and thence to the end of the first servitude and commencement of the administra- tion of Othniel 18 years, including in this last the eight yearn of the first servitude, in which last particular Mr. Cunninghame coincides with him.' This makes a total of 44 years. On the other hand, Mr. Cunninghame makes the same interval to be, for Joshua and the elders, or anarchy, 27 years, and eight in addition to the first servitude : total 35 years, making a difference from Dr. Hales of 9 years. Archbishop Usher gives 40 years from the division of the lands to Othniel, and shortens the administration of Ehud from 80 to 20 years. Jackson assigns to Joshua and the Interregnum 27 years.* Playfair makes the interval for Joshua and the first servitude only 25 years." Brett gives 35 years from the death > Dr. Eussell's Conn., vol. i. p. 128. » lb. vol. i. p. 181. ' Cbron. of Israel, etc., p. 46, * Dr. Russell's Conn., vol. i. p. 185. « lb. vol. i. p. 186. ODE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 93 of Moses to the end of the first servitude, which allows 27 years for Joshua and the elders.' And, finally, Dr. Hussell, after rejecting Dr. Hales' additional 10 years, fixes the whole length of the administration of Joshua, and the elders and an- archy, at 27 years. It is only necessary to observe, in general, in reference to these computations, that while they vary with, and often contradict each other, they stand directly opposed to the explicit statement of Scripture. For instance : Making the 450 years of Acts xiii. 20 to end with the death of Eli, flatly contradicts the statement of St. Paul, who explicitly fixes its termination to the com- mencement of the joint judgeship 'of Samuel with the last nine years of Eli and Samson. His words are, " After the division of the land by lot, God gave unto them judges about the space of 450 years, until Samuel the prophet,^' etc. So, also, the including of the' eight years of the first servitude in the alleged 18 years of anarchy. Eegarding this latter period, as we have said, the Scripture is entirely silent ; while it resumes the regular chronological links between the death of Joshua and the close of the period of anarchy, by the insertion of the eight years of servitude as instigated by, and consequently following, that period of misrule. As to the notion of Abul Pharaji, that Phinehas governed the people after the death of Joshua, it is directly contrary to Judg. XX. 28, where we read that he stood before the ark at the very, time when there was no king in Israel, the very state of things described by Josephus under the term anarchy. Indeed, though "Israel" is said to have "served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshtia" (Josh. xxiv. 31; Judg. ii. 1), it is evident that that right- eous generation were all very soon after the death of Joshua " gathered to their fathers," and were succeeded by another " who knew not the Lord" (Judg. ii. 10), and whose idolatrous defection, as described verses 11-13, rapidly followed. In the absence, therefore, of any chronological data by which to determine these collateral events, while the priesthood of the pious Phinehas was contemporary with this state of misrule, yet it failed either to check or remove it. Further : It is obvious, from a comparison of the age of his father with that of Aaron, that he passed through both the period of anarchy and of the first servi- tude. Aaron at his death was 103 years old 1 Brett's Chron. Essay on Snored Hist. See p. 37 of Essay; pp. 112, 114, of History. (Numb, xxxiii. 39), in the 39th year of the Exode. On the supposition, therefore, that his son Eleazar was 90 years old at his father's death, and that he died, as is generally thought, in his 107th year, soon after the death of Joshua, his son Phinehas who succeeded to the priesthood, say, at 45, would, if he died at 80, have lived to the time of Othniel. Certain it is, from Josh. xx. 28, that Phinehas lived in the midst of these troublous times. And, in reference to the scheme of the learned Usher, we have only to say that — like the bed of Procrustes, now lengthening and then shortening his dates to suit his purpose — it is so confused on this period, and so at variance with the testimony of the written word, that no reliance can be placed upon it. Finally, as we shall see, the true period, from " the division of the land by lot" to the commencement of the first servitude, was 45 years ; and the whole period, from the Exode to the foundation of the Temple in the fourth year of Solomon, 587 years. SECTION VII. A verification of the true years, in the discrepancy betweer. 1 Kings vi. 1 and Acts xiii. 17-22. We shall now proceed to verify the compu- tations given of this period in page 92, by a direct appeal to the events detailed in the sacred narrative as a whole. In order to this, take, in the first place, the following analysis of the discrep- ancy between 1 Kings vi. 1 and Acts xiii. 17-22. 1. Both passages begin with the Exode ; but — 2.- The passage in 1 Kings vi. 1 carries the events narrated beyond those of Acts xiii. 17-22 ; while the dates of this last passage exceed the whole number of years of 1 Kings vi. 1 by more than 100 years. 3. It follows, that if the dates given in the detailed events of this period decide in favor of Acts xiii. 17-22, the chronology of 1 Kings vi. 1 must be an error. That we may place this matter in the clearest possible light, let us set down, first, all the dates specified in Acts xiii : 1st. Wanderings in the wilderness, 40 years. 2d. Division of tlie lands after entering into Canaan, 5 8d. Thence until Samuel tlio Prophet «0 " 4th. Then to the end of Saul's rotgn 40 " Total 685 Whole numher of years between the Exode and the fourth year of Solomon, as given in 1 Kings vi.l 480 years. Excess in favor of Acts to the death of Smil. ... 55 " 94 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. But let us first consider the two breaks or chasms which occur in this period, and which are hence called conjectural dates. 1. The first relates to the period between the death of Moses and the time of the Judges. This period, as already stated, embraces the following events, as recorded in the Book of Judges, chapters i., ii., and iii., to the eighth verse inclusive, viz : — the dividing of the land by lot ; the death of all the elders who outlived Joshua ; the rising up of " another generation which knew not the Lord ;" their conquest of the remnant of the nations left by Joshua ; and their final servi- tude under Cushan-Eishathaim, consequent upon their intermarriages with the idolatrous Canaan- ites. The following is submitted as a solution of the chronological difficulties involved in the period between the death of Moses and the first servitude. Caleb when sent out as a spy was 40 years old.^ . . 40 years. Add wanderings in the wilderness after the return ofthesples 89!" " Total 79 " Joshua's age at his death was 110 years,' but be was 85* when the land was divided, five years after the end of wanderings. De- duct from 85, the 79 years as above, leaves. 6 '• Joshua lived after this 25 " Total. .110 Mr. Cunninghame tells us that Caleb at the death of Joshua was 95 years old ;' but here we have a demonstration that Caleb and Joshua were of the same age. The main difficulty, however, regarding this particular epoch is, the conjectural 20 years of anarchy, as inserted in our Table. In addition to what we said on the subject of this period in con- nection with the priesthood of Phinehas, we adopt the following method for its adjustment. Whole period from Exode to the 4th year of Solomon . . .587 years. Ist Servitude.. 8 yrs. Brought forward. .111 yrs. 2a do. ..18 " Othniel . 40 " 8d do. ..20 " Ehud— Shamgar. . SO " 4th do. .. 1 " Deborah and Barak 40 " 5th do. ..18 " Gideon .. 40 " 6th do. ..40 " Abimelech . 8 " Total Ill Tola........ Jair..... . 28 " . 22 " Jepbthah .. 6 " Ibzan . 7 " Elon .. 10 " Abdon .. 8 " Samuel's separate ad- ministration . . . .. 24 " Deduct.... .. 414 " Leaves 178 « ■ Josh. xiv. 7. « Nuir b. xiii. 21-83. ' Josh. xxiv. 29. • Compare Josh. xiv. 7 with verse 10. » Cliron. of Israel, etc., p. 59. From 173 years, Deduct for wanderings 40 years. do. " dividing lands 5 " do. " Joshua after that 25 " do. " Saul, as flist king 40 " do. " David 40 '' do. to the fourth year of Solomon.... 8 " 153 ' This leaves for anarchy 20' " It results, that, by the simple process of adding together all the specified links in the chain of this period, and deducting the sum total from the whole period of 58V years between the Exode and the founding of the Temple, we have a dem- onstration of the length of the period of anar- chy. 2. The second chasm relates to the period of SamueVs administration. The first thing here to be considered, is the fact that Samuel's official character was three-fold — he acted as Priest^ as Prophet^ and as Judge.* In the next place, we are to note that he is said to have "judged Israel all thfi days of his life" * One thing, therefore, is certain from this, that Samuel executed the office of judge prior to the death of Eli.° Most chronologists assign to his judical administration 21 years; but, that this is entirely too short, \s evident from the above facts, not only, but also from St. Paul's chronology of this period (Acts xiii. 19, 20), where his 450 years begins at the close of the five years "division of the land by lot," and ends with the commencement of Samuel's administration as judge. If then we return to the specified dates of the whole period, we reach the following result: "Whole period fl*om Exode to 8d year of Solomon 587 years. Deduct Exode 40 years. do. division of land 5 " do. for Saul 40 " do. for David 40 " do, for Solomon 3 " 128 " 459 " Add for Samuel's separate administration as Judge. 24 " Total ttom division of lands to Samuel's death 488 " Deduct 450 years from division of land "until Sam- uel the prophet's" first year as Judge 450 " Total term of Samuel's judicial administration ... 88 " It is here to be observed, in the first place, that St. Paul's language, "and after the division of the land by lot, God gave Israel judges, about'' the ' See pp. 92, 98 of this work. a 1 Sam. ii. 11, 18, 19 ; iii. 1. s i gam. iii. 18, 15-20, » 1 Sam. vii. 6-15. » 1 Sam. vii. 15. ' On this subject, compare 1 Sam. vii. 6 with chap. viii. and X. 1. ' It is objected that there is any ground for alleging a disci-epanoy between the woi-ds of St. Paul in Acts xiii. 20 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 95 space of 450 years," is to be taken in a qualified sense. The phrase " about the space of" etc., in- cludes the time of the intervening servitudes of 111 years ; so that the actual period of the judges amounted to only 303 years. And so the ac- count given above of the threefold oflBcial char- acter of Samuel, as priest, prophet, and judge, qualifies the statement of Samuel having " judged Israel all the days of his life" — meaning, that reference is made to his whole complex adminis- and those of 1 Kings vi. 1, for the reason that we mast distinguish heiwem time in the dative and time m tJte accu- sative. Aooording to the canons of Greek oritioism, it is claimed that there is no material difference between an expression of time, when marked by the aeousative and when marked by the genitive or dative. "The accusative does not always designate duration, yet duration must always be expressed by the accusative." " The invariable force of the dative, in such expressions, is, to answer the question when t or in what time? — not, /or what time ? " It is hence concluded that our translation of the words in Acts xiii. 20, &s erctrt TerpaKoaiois Kai ircvriiKovTa, " about the space of 450 years," is incorrect, inasmuch as that mean- ing would demand the accusative, etc. To this, however, it may be replied, that the syllabus of the chronology of the period between the division of the Lind and the commencement of. Samuel's judicial admin- istration, accords with the number of years in Acts xiii. 20 ; and, also, that the Syriao renders the clause in the same sense as our English version (e. g. 5(5^)3 SS^SI m^l ^'iplb an"' 'I'^SIC 'I'^iCSm " ^^^ '""'■ hundred and fifty years he gave to them judges"), not only; but the above Greek canon is not to be found in any of the versions and com- mentators extant. Whitby, Scott, Hales, Eussell, the Syriac as above, Castillo in his Latin version, and Bishop Kessler in his Demonstration of Messiah, all receive the words in the same sense as our English version. Whitby, in his note on the verse, considers and refutes the interpre- tation of Grotius and Usher, who, on the authority of a various reading, would fix the 450 years to the period from the birth of Isaac to the division of the lands. The conclusion therefore seems to be, that in Acts xiii. 20 we must admit an anomaly in Greek Syntax. Nor is there any difficulty in this, seeing that even Mills' expla- nation requires the supposition of two ellipses, marked as follows, parenthetically and in italic: — " After these things," (which tool; place) "in" (aperiodof) "about four hundred and fifty years, be gave thein judges." Now, if this be admitted, where is the diflfioulty of supplying one parenthesis? — receiving the passage in the usual sense: " After these things, in {avery long period 0/ time, being) " about four hundred and fifty years," etc.. Further, Ea- sebius, who himself wrote in Greek, gives to the passage, in his Chronicon, the same sense it has in our English Bibles. And, finally, there is a quotation from Origen by Dr. Kennioott (Dissertatio, Generalis, p. 86), wherein Origen cites the Greek text of 1 Kings v. 18 and connects it with 1 Kings vi. 1, as follows : — Hroi/iao-au tovs Xiflous km Ta (v\a TpKTiii eriatv ep le rif TCTapTifCTci pirivi SevTsfif Buo-iXcu- ovTUS Tov BafftXcuf SoAo/iwiroj Effi IffpariX, etc., and it will be sejjn that in the Greek, of which the sense is, " they made ready stones and timber thbee tears, and in the foukth TEAK of the reign of King Solomon, over Israel," the words three years, are in the dative case, according to the idiom of the above passage in Acts. (See Cunninghame's Chron. of Israel— Appendix II., pp. 124-12?.) tration; while the ending of the 450 from the division of the land, by a specific reference to a particular time — " until Samuel the prophet" — can only be understood to refer to the commence- ment of his judicial administration. Now the 24 years in the Table scarcely meet the statement regarding his prolonged office as judge ; they refer to his separate and independent judicial career, after the death of Eli. Hence tlie ap- propriation to it, in our computation, of an ag- gregate of 33 years. It follows that, by supposing Samuel to have acted as judge contemporaneously with the latter part of the time of Eli, it would seem at least consistent with the circumstance of the declared inefficiency of that judge's administration, as the occasion of it. (See 1 Sam. iii. 11-18.) During this interval, therefore — to which we appropriate nine years — transpired those events which ended in the capture of the ark, etc. (1 Sam. iv-vi.) ; its final removal to Kirjath-jearim ; and the assem- blage of the people by Samuel at Mizpeh (1 Sam. vii. 1-5), where we have the express mention of the fact, that "Samuel judged the children of Israel at Mizpeh," indicating that then and there commenced his separate administration, as above, of 24 years. But in 1 Sam. vii. 2, we are informed that the ark remained in Kirjath-jearim for a long time — 20 years. Also, that Samuel having ^'' grown old, he made his sons judges over Israel," who "not walking in his ways, but turning aside after lucre, taking bribes, and perverting judgment," etc., the elders of Israel assembled at Bamah, and de- manded of Samuel to make them a king, to judge them like other nations." (1 Sam. viii. 1-5.) Hence the anointing of Saul by Samuel, as the first king of Israel (1 Sam. x.), 24 years after the arrival of the Ark at Kirjath-jearim. Before we sum up the results of the above computations, it will be in place to ofier a few explanatory remarks on the chronology of the sixth servitude. It is on this period, in connec- tion with the administrations of Eli and Samson, that Mr. Miller availed himself of those dates in his theory, which make the 6000th year of the world to end in a. d. 1843. He inserted for the sixth servitude 40 years, for Eli 40 years, and for Samson 20 years : total, 100 years. " Our Bible Chronology" of this period makes the administration of Eli to have begun and ended with the 40 years of the sixth servitude, and the 20 years of Samson to have been included in the last 20 years of Eli : total, 40 years. Proof : — In Judges xiii. 1, we find that the sixth 96 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. servitude lasted 40 years. Between the death of Abdon, Judg. xii. 14, a. m. 2953 (immediately after which, the Lord delivered Israel into the hands of the Philistines for 40 years, chap. xiii. 1), and that of Mi, a. m. 2993 (who judged Israel 40 years, 1 Sam. iv. 18), is just 40 years. Eli therefore was the immediate successor of Abdon, as one of the judges of Israel. Then, the narra- tive which immediately follows the death of Abdon, gives an account of the birth of Samson (compare Judg. xii. 14, with chap. xiii. 2-24), not of the commencement of his judicial administra- tion. Further: At the time of Samson's mar- riage, " the Philistines had dominion over Israel," Judg. xiv. 4. Samson was then a younff man (verse 10), say about 20 years of age. But it was at this very time that his career as defender and deliverer of Israel commenced. " The spirit of the Lord began to move him at times in the camp of Dan, between Zora and Astaol ;" and when he came to his father and mother, asking them to procure as his wife the woman of Timnath, " they knew not that it was of the Lord," and " that he sought an occasion against the Philistines." Judg. xiii. 25 ; xiv. 1-4. It will not avail here to object that the above arrangement places two judges over Israel at the same time. For, it was the supineness and want of decision betrayed by Eli, together with the misrule of his two sons, Hophni and Phinehas,* that rendered Samson's mission necessary. And, what is decisive on this subject, is the statement, Judg. XV. 20, which expressly declares that " Sam- son judged Israel in the days of the Philistines 20 years." The conclusion therefore is, that the 40 yeai-s of Eli, and the 20 years of Samson, are included in the 40 years of the sixth servitude. Finally: The result of our computations of this portion of the fourth period of " our chronol- ogy" is as follows : namely — 1. Dednot a. m. 2513, the year of the Exodus, from A. ii. 2993, the year of the coaimencement of Samuers judicial administration, and you have the precise 480 years of 1 Kings vi. 1. 2. From the whole period iVom the Exode to foundation of the Temple 587 years. Deduct for wanderings 40 years. " division of lands 5 " " Saul, David, and Solomon 83 " 128 years. Leaves 459 " Deduct ftom this the time of Samuers joint official administration with Eli 9 " Leaves Which gives the 450 years of Acts xiii. 4S0 ' Compare 1 chap. iii. 1-14. 1, p. 608. Sam. li. 27, 28 with verses 22-25; and Seo also Townseud's Biblo, Eng. ed. vol. 8. To the years of 1 Kings vi. l,viz. 480 yeaiB, add the following : For Samuel's separate administration 24 " " Saul, Acts xiii. 21 40 " " David, Sam. v. 4, 5 40 " " Solomon, 1 Kings V. 1 ; vi. 1 ; XI. 42 8 " lOT Total 687 " Finally— 4 If to 1 Kings vi. 1, viz 4S0 years, we add the dates of St Paul, Acts xiii. 17-22 : For Samnel 24 " " Saul 40 • And also the dates beyond Saul, as included in 1 Kings vi. 1 ; For David 40 " " Solomon 8 " 107 Total 687 " And then subtract therefl'om 480 " It adds to toe current gukonologt of this period, AS GIVEN BY Usher 107 years. SECTION VIII. On the four decrees of the Persian monarchs, in reference to Ban. ix. 24, 25. — " Our Bible Chronology''^ versus Mr. Gliddon, on the Arir tiquity of Egypt. Note 15. Time of Ezra's Commission, etc., period VII. — There were at least three, and as some contend, four diflFerent edicts, from which to date the commission to restore and to build Jerusalem, Dan. ix. 25. The first was that issued in the first year of Cyrus, as recorded Ezra i. The second, that of Darius, recorded Ezra vi. But both these related to the Temple alone. A fourth edict, as some call it, was that given to Nehemiah in the 20th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus ; but, that this was nothing more than "a personal and private commission to an individual to go and carry out with great speed and vigor, " what had been previously commenced by another, will fully appear by a careful comparison of Ezra, chap, vii., with Neh., chap. ii. The previously begun work was that executed by Ezra under the third edict, issued by the Persian monarch Artaxerxes Longi- manus in the seventh year of his reign, and is unquestionably the one from which to date the commencement of the above " command to restore and to build Jerusalem." It is recorded, Ezra, chap. vii. — " JN'ow after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes (Longimanus), king of Persia, to Ezra the son of Seraiah, etc., the king granted all his request, according to the hand of the Lord his God upon him. And there went up some of the children of Israel, and of the priests, and the Levitcs, etc., unto Jerusalem, in the seventh year OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 97" >f Avtaxerxes the king." It hence follows that the above important command, Dan. ix. 24-27, commences with the seventh year of Artaxeixes Longimanus. Note 16. Egypt. — In reference to Egypt, Mr. Gliddon says: "Whether we confine Egyptian history to the contracted limits of Usher's Chro- nology and the Hebrew verity, or take in ex- tenso the widest range legitimately admissible on the authority of the Septuagint version, it will be found that the time-honored chronology of Egypt carries us back to the remotest era of early periods," displaying evidence of an existing gov- ernment, a numerous people skilled in the arts, sciences, laws, etc., etc., with a " priesthood pos- sessing a religion in which the unity of the God- head and his attributes in trinities or triads, a belief in the immortality of the soul, a certainty of ultimate judgment, and a hope of a resurrec- tion, are discoverable, concealed though they may be," he adds, " by the mysticisms of a wise but despotic hierarchy, and loaded, by the vulgar castes and the uninitiated, with the grossest su- perstition."' And yet Mr. Gliddon demands — "Are not Egyptian studies, and the mythology, philosophy, and doctrines of that misrepresented race, inter- esting to the divine who attests the Unity of the Godhead and the Holy Trinity ? Can the theo- logian derive no light from the pure primeval faith ( ! ) that glimmers from Egyptian hieroglyph- ics, to illustrate the immortality of the soul and a final resurrection 3" " Of course, shrouded as they are beneath a mantle of " mysticism," and " loaded with the grossest superstition," much more "light" is to be derived fi-om them than from the inspired Mosaic record ! For, though in former years the most authentic annals of Egyptian history, and the only certain accounts we had of early Egyp- tian manners and customs,- institutions and sys- tems, were derived from the Old Testament ; yet in these modern times of Egyptological discover- ies, " excepting the period of the Exodus, and the previous visit of Abraham, with the interesting events transpiring during the interval, we cannot, in the Bible, expect to, gather more than inci- dental and transitory references to subjects on which we seek for information : because the Pen- tateuch is a history of the early Hebrews,"^ etc.; while " the time-honored chronology of Egypt" ilane, can " carry us back to the remotest era of aarly periods !" ' Ancient Egypt, etc., p. 52. » lb. p. 31. = lb. p. 34. 13 But, alas ! when we repair to these time- honored records of Egyptian chronology, and " spread our canvas to the breeze, and begin our voyage down the stream of time, fogs and misls,^' says Mr. Gliddon, " preclude a very distinct sight of the course. We have many shoals to avoid ; and there are many long and gloomy portages, over which we must carry our imaginary bark, without knowing precisely the length or the course of the river. As we descend, we shall find enormous landmarks [e. g., the pyramids], attesting the greatness of the builders, without always telling the ago of their erection. We shall steer by them all, noting the relative bear- ings of each ; till, having reached the obelisk of Heliopolis, b. c. 2088, the mists will gradually dissipate as we proceed : but the shoals are still nu- merous, and the current still swift. W^hen, however, we arrive at the stupendous hypostile Halls of Karnak, at the temples and palaces of Thebes, the hoary 'Amunei,' or temple of Amun, about the year 1800 b. c, the passage will be easy and the scenery interesting for a period of 2000 years ; when the hieroglyphical annals cease, and sub- sequent events are chronicled in universal his- tory !"' Vfery good. Starting from " the remotest era of early history," with the " time-honored chro- nology of Egypt" as our chart of observation, " as we descend down the stream of time till we reach the obelisk at Heliopolis, b. c. 2088," "fogs and mists," and " many long and gloomy port- ages," " preclude a very distinct sight of the course." Aye, and such chronological " fogs and mists and long and gloomy portages," that Mr. Gliddon, after a residence of 23 years at Cairo, with all his knowledge then and since acquired, cannot determine the chronological whereabouts of "Menes," the first Egyptian Pharaoh, within the period of 500 years !* With all deference, however, we think tliat we have driven away some portions, at least, of these "fogs and mists" of Egyptian history prior to B. c. 2088. First — We have shown that the Mizraim of Gen. x. 6, the son of Ham and grand- son of Noah, is the same with "Menes," who, Mr. Gliddon informs us, was the founder and first king of the Memphite dynasty. But Mizraim must have flourished between the birth of Ar- phaxad the son of Shera, b. c. 2474, and that of Eber, b. c. 2375, an interval of 99 years. Now Mr. Gliddon states that " the Scriptures inform us that MizraimJs descendants colonized Lower ' lb. p. 39. sSeep. 69 of this work. 98 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CKITICALLY EXAMINED. EgypV^^ He also states that " Menes founded Memphis,"" and that the "fragments of Manetho" and "the ancient authors, Herodotus, Eratos- thenes, Diodorus, Josephus, the old Egyptian Chronicle of Castor, and the Canon of Syncellus, all agree that Menes was the first king [or Pha- raoh] of Egypt."* As, then, Mizraim and Menes have been historically proven to be one and the same person;* and supposing him to have mi- grated from the plains of Babylonia across the Euphrates into Egypt at 50 years of age, or about B. c. 2424 ; by deducting from it the epoch of the Call of Abraham, b. c. 2083, we have a period of 341 years, from Menes to the time of that patriarch. I add, however, in this connection, that we have shown — Second, That those stupendous structures, the pyramids, were reared, from the first to the last, within a period perfectly reconcilable with the "contracted limits of the Hebrew verity."" For, even admitting that they were all erected before the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and that hence " they had nothing to do with them but to look on them ;" yet, to the 341 years above we can add the first half of the 430 years of their sojourn in Egypt, making a total of 556 years. And, when we take into the account the fact, that the first emigrants from the plains of Baby- lon to Lower Egypt were not gradually emerging from a state of barbarism, but were possessed of all the arts and civilization of the autediluvian world ; and also, that from the favorable circum- stances, between the flood and Abraham, for a rapid increase of the earth's population, there were, instead of "100,000 inhabitants in all the earth" in the time of that patriarch, about 200,000,000 ;' — I repeat, in view of these facts, we have ample resources in men, and means, and time, with which to account for the building of Thebes by Menes, and for the dikes, canals, and the erection of all the palaces, temples, pyramids, etc., etc., which history appropriates to that an- cient country within " the contracted limits of the Hebrew verity." Again : If, as Mr. Gliddon says, he could not define with precision the epoch of Meneg within 500 years ; ' and if, with' the " light reflected on the subject by the old Egyptian Chronicle," the earlier history of Egypt is all wrapped in fable; and if, again, with Manetho's Egyptian "consecutive dynasties" at his elbow upon his > Ancient Egypt, p. 46. ' lb. p. 84. ' lb. p. 52. ' See pp. 67, 68 of this work. « lb. pp. 68, 70. ' lb. p. 79. ' Ancient Efrypt, p, 51 arrival at the epoch of the fourth Memphite dynasty, and so onward to the end of the fif- teenth, as Mr. Gliddon informs us, " we have nothing as our guide "but the very doubtful numbers of Manetho's kings and reigns," so that " at the present day, there is no reason for accept- ing the number of his kings and the length of their reigns," etc.;' certainly, we who are not professed Egyptologists, may well be excused if we decline to plunge into this region of " dense darkness," of "fogs and mists," to do for them what they are unable to do for themselves. We will therefore respectfully take our leave of the time-honored annalists of the remotest era of the early Egyptian periods, together with their copy- ists, and pass to a period in the history of this renowned country, where a clearer atmosphere will reveal the objects of historic interest with at least somewhat greater distinctness of vision. To this end, in harmonizing the chronology of the sixteenth and thirty-first dynasties inclusive, with that of the " Hebrew verity," there are three CHRONOLOGICAL STAND-POINTS, with which all the others, anterior, iutermediate, and posterior, must coincide. The first one of the three is expressly noted in the Old Testament. Rehoboam, the son and successor of Solomon, ascended the throne oi Judah, A. M. 3137. In the First Book of Kings, xiv. 25, 26, we read : " And it came to pass IN THE FIFTH YEAR of King Rehoboam, that Shishak, king of Egypt, came up against Jeru- salem ; and he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house : he even took away all," etc. Now, all Egyptologists admit that this Shishak of Scrip- ture is the same with Sheshonk, the Pharaoh of Egypt who invaded Jerusalem as above, under the reign of Rehoboam, king of Judah. This invasion, consequently, must have transpired in A. M. 3142 — B. c. 990. He hence occupies that position in " our chronology." The other two relate to profane chronology ; — the first, " the conquest of Egypt by Camhyses, in the year b. c. 526 ; the other, the conquest Ol Egypt by Alexander the Great, b. c. 332. Upon these dates all chronologists coincide. With each of them, the sum total of the years reigned by the last 16 dynasties, preceding and down to the Macedonian, must agree ; — i. e., in the year 525 B. c. the twenty-sixth Saitic dynasty must end; and in the year b. c. 332 the rule of tb. Persians must cease." ' 1 Ancient Egypt, pp. 49, 60. » lb. p. 61. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 99 The seventeenth dynasty, that of the Hykshos, or Shepherd Kings, calls for special remark. Dr. Scyffarth, in his " Summary of Eecent Dis- coveries in Biblical Chronology," etc., affirms, on the authority of Manetho and Josephus, that these Shepherd Kings were the Israelites or 'Hebrews ! ' But, that no idea can be more pre- posterous, is evident from the whole drift of the sacred narrative respecting them, from their first entrance into Goshen, down to the period of their subjection ta bondage at the end of their first 215 years of sojourn in that "land of strangers," at the hand of the Pharaoh who "knew not Joseph," as given in the Book of Genesis, chap, xlvi. to the end, and Exod. i. 1-8. True, Joseph we know was " set over all the land of Egypt" as a niler, and rode in the second chariot of the king, while the people bowed before him. At the same time, we know that on the throne Pha- raoh was greater than he,* Indeed, it is an ab- solute perversion of all language to pretend that they exercised regal authority in Egypt down to the period of the Exode. The Pharaoh before whom Joseph stood (Gen- esis xxxix. 1, xli. 46) was Amenoph L, a.m. 2328, B.C. 1804. The Pharaoh to whom Moses was sent to demand the release of the enslaved Israelites,' was Eameses I., a. m. 2514, b. c. 1618. Their period of bondage is reckoned to have commenced from Jacob's going down to Egypt, a. m. 2298, which, deducted from the above, is exactly 215 years. And — Sheshonk, or Shishak, as we have seen, in- vaded Jerusalem in the fifth year of Eehoboam, a. m. 3142, B. c. 990. SECTION IX. Historical remarks respecting Bahylon — Assyria — Mesopotamia or Syria — Canaan, Palestine, or the Holy Land — Phoenicia — Medo-Persia — Greece — Rome. Note 11. Babylon; Assyria. — Babylon was founded by Nimrod, about a. m. 1686, b. c. 2446, on the plains of Shinar, the situation of which country is clearly determined by Scripture, Gen. X., xi. ; but we cannot fix its boundaries further than to say, that it embraced not only the Lower « Summary, etc., pp. 116, 195. « Gen. xli. 89-44. ' Compare Exodus vii. 7 with xiv. 21-81. Mesopotamia, but the whole region between the Tigris and the Euphrates. Here the inhabitants, doubtless at the instigation of Nimrod, that " mighty hunter before the Lord" — the first king of Babylon, and perhaps of the world— com- menced the erection of a tower that should bid defiance to their destruction by a second deluge ; but God was displeased with their presumptuous act, and confounding their language, which at first was one. and the same, they were dispersed throughout the whole earth. (Gen. xi.) Hence the origin of the name of Babylon, from babel or confusion. Here Nimrod com- menced the erection of the city of Babylon, which, under Belus the first and Queen Semiramis, at length became one of the most extensive and magnificent cities that ever existed. It formed the capital of the empire, called also Chaldea, Ps. cxxxvii. 1. Assyria was founded by Asher, about A. m. 1'706, B. c. 2436. It embraced the country of Armenia on the north, Media and Persia on the east, Susiana, a province of Persia, on the south, and the Tigris or Hiddekel on the west. Asher built Nineveh, which was its capital, with other cities. Gen. x. 11, 12. Assyria is the Gurdistan of modern times. Being early invaded by Nim- rod, it was added to his dominions, and for many ages, under three successive dynasties, down to the time of Pul, or Belus the Second, a. m. 3347, it was known in history as the Assybio-Babylo- NiAN Empire. These ancient empires speedily rose to the greatest splendor and extent ; but when we take into account the excessive effeminateness, credu- lousness, and superstition of the people — (who had for their idolatrous worship the gods Bel, Nebo, Shishak, Nergal, Merodach, their goddess Suc- coth-benoth, and the fire), and the excessive dis- soluteness of life and manners produced by them — we are not surprised that each successive con- queror, adopting " the luxurious habits of the vanquished nations, were soon obliged to resign their dominions to fresh swarms of uncorrupted warriors, who also in their turn degenerated, and gave way to new invaders." Their history, how- ever, during the long interval above, may be re- garded as entirely fabulous. During the reign of Sardanapalus I., the supposed son of Pul, or Belus II., a conspiracy took place, by which this vast empire was divided into the three kingdoms of Nineveh, Babylon, and the kingdom of the Medcs. Under Nabonassar, Babylon was subjected to Assyria, a. m. 3382, b. c. 750. Not long after, the Babylonians and the Modes revolted from 100 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Assyria; but Babylon was again recovered by Assyria, a. m. 3427, b. c. 705, and so contin- ued, down to the time of Nebuchadnezzar, A. M. 3517, B. 0. 615, when he laid the founda- tion of the great ChaldjEO-Babylonian Em- pire. In the 13th year of Nebuchadnezzar, he inva- ded Jerusalem and carried Zedekiah and most of the Jews captive to Babylon, whence the com- mencement of the 10 years captivity of Judah, as predicted by Jeremiah (chap, xxv.'ll, a. m. 3528, B. c. 602) ; when, two years after, he had his great vision of the colossal image of gold, silver, brass, and iron mingled with clay, which Daniel the prophet, one of the captives, interpreted to symbolize the four great monarchies which were to rule in the earth, down to the close of " the times of the Gentiles" (see Dan. ii., iv., vii., and viii.), viz., the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, and Roman. From A. M. 3517, commenced the fiest pro- phetic EMPIRE, the Babylonian, denoted by the "head of gold" of the colossal image and the synchronic two-winged lion of Dan. vii. 4. It con- tinued till it was overthrown by Cyaxares II. and Cyrus, A. M. 3580, i). c. 652, and embraced a period of 63 years. " The Babylonians pretended to great skill in astronomy, soothsaying, and magic (Dan. ii. 2, iv. 7, V. 7 ; Isa. xlvii. 12). From hence this pretended science spread into Canaan (Isa. ii. 6), if not into Egypt. Here Christianity was very early received by the Jews and others. Here the apostle Peter wrote one, if not both, of his epistles to his dispersed brethren of Judah (1 Peter v. 13) ; and here the Jews, since the destruction of their capital, have had famous synagogues, by one of the rabbis of which their large Talmud was framed. (See Ps. Ixxxvii. 4.) For the predic- tions of its utter ruin, see Isa. xiii., Jer. 1., Ii., and other prophets, all of which have been literally fulfilled to the letter. *j^* The contemporaneous kings, etc., of ancient Babylon, Nineveh, and the Chaldseo-Babylonian empire, with those of the sacred records, may be seen by reference to the Tabular Views. The same will apply to those of Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Note 1 8. Mesopotamia, or Syria. — This prov- ince constituted the first abode of man, both before and after the flood. In Scripture it is known by the name of AraM-Naharaim. The Hebrews called it Padan-Aram, It lay between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates, and, while the latter name above designated the northwest por- tion of it, or Meso]Miamia Proper,^ the former may be applied to the whole of it, as the Syria of the two rivers. In this enlarged sense, Stria was bounded by the Euphrates on the east, by the Mediterranean on the west, by Cilicia on the north, and by Phoenicia, Judea, and Arabia De- serta on the south." In this region were located, Eden,' Shinar, and Babylon. Here were born Peleg, or Phaleg, Te- rah, Abraham, Nahor, Sarah, Rebecca, Leah, Rachel, and all the sons of Jacob except Benja- min.* This extensive country, reaching from the Med- iterranean to the Euphrates, and from Mount Tau- rus to Egypt and Arabia, figures largely in the history of the world. Its more important divisions were Syria Proper, Coelo-Syria, and Syria Pales- tina, including Judea. The Syrians were engaged in frequent wars with the Israelites and Jews, the first one of which is recorded in 2 Sam. viii-x., in the time of David, by whom they were defeated in two great battles. At this time Zoba was its capital ; but Rezin hav- ing rebelled against Benhadad I., it was transferred to Damascus.'' In the course of soijie eighty years after this period, about a.m. 3165, b. c. 967, an alliance was formed between Asa, king of Judah, and the Syrian king, Benhadad H., against Baa- sha, king of Israel. Benhadad HI., in the time of Ahab, king of Israel, invaded Samaria, about a. m. 3205, when, after a series of battles, the Syrians were defeated with a loss, in all, of some 150,000 men.' About twelve years after, Samaria was again invaded by the Syrians, in the time of Elijah the prophet, but were signally discomfited ; and soon after, Benhadad HI., being sick, sent his prime minister Hazael to Elisha the prophet, who predicted the elevation of the latter to the throne,' together with the calamities he would bring upon his subjects. Following this event, in the first year of Hazael, Avas the attempt on the part of Amaziah, king of Judah, and Jehoram, king of Israel, to recover Ramoth-Gilead from the Syrians, but both were defeated by Jehu.' Thirty years after this, the Syrian king Hazael invaded Judah, and the next year the land of Is- rael, which latter he devastated in the reign of • See Acts vii. 2-4. ' See Map of tlio World in thia Work. ' For tlie Scriptural aooouiit of Eden, consult Gen. ii. 8-15 ; Isa. xxxvii. 12 ; Ezek. xxviii. 12 ; also 2 Kings xix. 12, 13. • See Gen. xi. 81 ; xxix-xxx ; Neh. ix. 7 ; Acts vii. 2 -4. ' 1 Kings xi. 23-25 ; Isa viii. • 2 Kings xv-xx. ' 2 Kings viii. ' 2 Kings viii-ix. ; 2 Chron. xxii. OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. ■101 Jehoahaz, whose son Jehoash, however, recovered the cities which his father had lost. Hazael was succeeded by Benhadad IV., whose whole reign was devoted in war against Israel ; but their king, Jeroboam II., defeated the Syrians and .captured Damascus : which, however, was soon recovered by Rezin, who, in his turn, invaded. Judea and besieged Jerusalem.' Soon after this, the power of Syria began to wane, and was sub- jected by Tiglath-Pileser, in the overthrow of Damascus, to the kings of Assyria.' Subse- quently it became tributary, first, to the Babylo- KiANS upon their conquest of Assyria ; then to the Persians, and to the Macedonians under Alexander ; finally on the division of Alexander's empire among his four generals, Syria fell to the lot of- Seleucus. In the year 90 b. c, Pom- pey the Great put an end to the power of the Seleucidce by the defeat of their king, Tigranes, and Syria became a Roman province, and so con- tinued until the seventh century after Christ, when it was overrun by the Saracens, under whose Mohammedan sway it has remained down to the present time. I^ote 19. Canaan (Palestine, or the Holy Land.) — The Canaanites were originally descend- ed from Canaan, the son of Ham. Canaan lies in the 32d, 33d, and 34th degrees of north latitude, and in the 36th and 3'Ith. of east longitude, from London. It is in length about 200 miles from Dan on the north to Beersheba on the south; and is bounded by Lebanon and Syria on the north, by the Mediterranean on the #fest, by Arabia Deserta and the land of the Ammonites, Moabites, and Midianites on the east, and that of Edom and the wilderness of Paran on the south, with Egypt on the southwest. The Canaanites very early degenerated, both in life and manners, and gave themselves up to the vilest idolatry. They were terribly enslaved by the descendants of both Shem and Japheth, agreeably to the curse denounced by Noah against Canaan (Gen. ix. 24-27). With this is also to be taken into connection the Divine purpose that Canaan was to become the special domain of the Hebrew or Israelitish descendants of Shem. Hence the call of Abraham, while yet in " Ur of the Chaldees," to leave his idolatrous country and kindred, and to settle in that land, with a prom- ise that it should be given to him and his seed for an everlasting possession.' At the time of Abraham's settlement in Canaan, > 2 Kings xiv. 28. ^ 2 Kings xvi. ' Gen. xi. 81 ; xii., xv., xvii., etc. it was occupied by the ten following nations : — the Kenites, the Kenidtes, and the Kadmoniten on the east of Jordan ; and the Hitiitcs, Perizeites, Hephaims, Amorites, Canaanites, GirgasMtes, and Jebusites on the west. In addition to these, there were settled on the borders of Canaan, or Palestine, several other nations, who are mentioned in the Bible — viz., the Philistines, descended from Mizraim, who, having expelled the Avites, settled in the south- west of Canaan. The Amalekites, the children of Amalek, a grandson of Noah, who settled on the south coast, westward of Jordan. The Mo- abites and Ammonites, the incestuous offspring of Lot, the former dwelling on the east of Jordan, the latter northeast of them. The Midianites or Keturians, from Midian, the fourth son ot Abraham by Keturah, part of whom settled on the northeast of the Red Sea, and the other part east of the Dead Sea. And the Edomites, the progeny of Esau, who occupied the mountainous tract of country originally possessed by the Hw- ites, to the south of Judea. Five of the kingdoms of the. Canaanites on the southeast — viz., Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Ze- boim, and Zoar — were invaded by Chedorlaoraer, king of Elam, a. m. 2092, who was finally repulsed by Abraham. All these cities, except the last, were, for their enormous wickedness, soon after destroyed by the judgment of God, and the coun- try turned into a standing lake, called the Dead Sea. Both the Canaanites and the other contiguous nations were, for the most part, the implacable enemies of the Israelites. Their six servitudes under one or other of them is evidence of this. But after various vicissitudes in war, the two kingdoms of Sihon and Off, on the east of Jordan, were overthrown by Moses; and subsequently, Joshua destroyed thirty-one of their kingdoms, and divided the land among the twelve tribes of Israel. After the death of Joshua, they were totally expelled from the cantons of Judah and Benjamin, and for the most part from those of Ephraim and Manasseh. Still, in several of the other tribes, they held a number of the principal cities, and either harassed or seduced the Israel- ites into idolatry. But, though these were more or less subdued by the Judges in Israel, yet, in the northern parts of Canaan sprang up the pow- erful kingdom of Hazor : which, however, was at length totally overthrown by Deborah and Barak. Finally, David almost finished the conquest of the Canaanites by the capture of Jebus or Jerusalem, one of their strongest holds; while the king of 102 OUE BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Egypt reduced those of Gezer, and gave it tt) his son-in-law Solomon. But this "good land," Canaan — "a land of brooks of water, of fountains, and depths that spring out of the valleys and hills ; a land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and fig-trees, and pomegranates, of oil-olive and honey, and of bread without scarceness ; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass ; ' — this land, the possession of which, by divine grant, was made over to the Hebrews or Israelites as God's chosen people, to preserve the worship of the true Jehovah and a knowledge of the true religion in the world, — was not long retained by them. In consequence of their idol- atrous apostasy both before and during the period of the judges — their abjuration of the divine theocracy, and subsequent acts of rebellion — God, in his righteous displeasure, finally gave them over into the hands of those Gentile monarchs whose iron rule was to extend over the nations of the earth, until their Messiah, " whose right it is,"' shall subdue all his idolatrous and anti- Christian usurpers, and restore his people, Judah and Israel, to " the first dominion."' Hence their subjection, in addition to six servitudes, to four successive captivities : — the first, under Tiglath- Pileser, a. m. 3361, b. c. Ill ;* the second, under Shalmaneser, a. m. 3387, b. o. 745;' the third, under Nebuchadnezzar, a, m. 3530, b. c. 602;° andthe/oar^A, under the Roman Titus, a. d. 70.' The captivity of the ten tribes under Shalman- eser has continued down to this day. At the expiration of the seventy years' Babylonish cap- tivity of Judah, a part of the tribe was restored to Jerusalem under Cyrus:' while, from the dispei-sion of the Jews in a. d. 70 " among all nations," they have continued to be " trodden down of the Gentiles," even to the present day. But while, on the one hand, Jehovah their covenant God hath said, that upon " their uncir- cumcised hearts being humbled, and they accept the punishment of their iniquity in the land of strangers whither they have been brought;" " then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant- with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember ; and I will rememler the land," ° i. e., Canaan, or Pales- tine : and he has therefore decreed that " the land shall not be sold forever, for the land is mine ;" '° ■ Deut. viii. 7-9. ' Ezek. xxi. 27. ' Mio. iv. 8. « 2 Kings xvi. 9. » 2 Kings xvii. 6. » 2 Kings xxv. 21. ' Lulce xxi. 24. " 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22, 28 ; Ezra i. 1-6. » Lev. xxvi. 41, 42. >» Lev. xxv. 28. So, on the other hand He has declared, that though " the land shall be left of them, and shall enjoy her Sabbaths while she lieth desolate with- out them," etc. ; " yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, / will not cast them away, neither mil I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them : for I am the Lord their God." ' Yea, the Most High " will lift up an ensign to the nations from far, and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth : and, behold, they shall come with speed swiftly."' "I will hiss for them, and gather them ; for I have redeemed them," saith the Lord : " And they shall increase as they have increased" ' Phqsnicia. — The Phoenicians were of Canaan- itish origin. The chief cities of Phoenicia were Sidon and Tyre. Sidon, supposed to have been founded by Sidon, a son of Ham, is one of the oldest cities in the world. It is situated on the Mediterranean, twenty-five miles above Tyre, and is now known by the name of Saide. Tyre, which, with Sidon, was located on the western coast of Canaan, on the Mediterranean, though " the daughter of Sidon," yet subsequently became her mistress, as in the days of Solomon, the Si- donians were subject to Hiram, king of Tyre, and were employed in preparing timber for the erec- tion of .Solomon's temple. Tyre, founded about A. M, 2267, was one of the most famous cities of the ancient world for commerce, wealth, and population. Both Sidon and Tyre were destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar 'about a. m. .3545, b. o. 587, but he permitted the Sidonians to retain their own kings. Subsequently, Sidon was besieged by the Persian king Darius Ochus, and destroyed. It was soon again rebuilt, however, and in eight- een years afterwards it submitted to Alexander. Upon the subversion of the Grecian empire, it fell under the power of the Romans, then of the Turks and the Sultans of Egypt ; till, finally, about A. D. 1289, they destroyed both it and Tyre, in order to promote their invasions of Palestine. In sacred history, mention is made of Tyre as " a strong city" in the time of Joshua. It "cost Nebuchadnezzar thirteen years' besiegement of it, before it was captured ; and then he found it de- serted, and its immense wealth carried off to an inaccessible place. To pacify his rage, he ordered an indiscriminate massacre of every person that could be found ; and, to compensate his disap- pointment after so long a siege, the prophet ' Lev. xxvi. 48, 44. " Isa. v. 26. ' Zooli. xi. 8. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 103 Ezekiel predicted that Egypt should be given to him.' The Tyrians who escaped from Nebu- chadnezzar, built a new city on an island not far off. Insular Tyre was also rebuilt, though it was not more than one-sixth in extent, compared with the old city. In Ezekiel xxvii., we have an account of the commercial transactions of Tyre, when in her glory. But it was predicted of her, " and it shall come to pass, that Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years, according to the days of one king : after the end of seventy years. Tyre shall sing as a harlot :" * which seventy years was coincident with the seventy years' continuance of the Babylonian empire, as at the end of that ime the Persian Cyrus encouraged its re-erection, t soon became as rich and populous as ever, and continued to flourish for two hundred years, when, Jieing taken by Alexander, though it was again prosperous for a time, the building of Alexandria diverted its trade, and its sources of wealth were dried up. For other prophecies against Tyre, see Isa. xxiii., Ezekiel xxvi., xxviii., etc. Its present name is Tgour, but scarcely any traces of its former greatness now exists. JVote 20. Mkdo-Pbrsia. — The Medes were descended from Madai, the third son of Japheth.' They formed one of the ruling nations of eastern Asia, extending from- the Tigris to the Indus, and occasionally passing their western frontier, penetrated as far as the Halys. Th^people of Media Proper were divided into six tribes, of which the chief was that of the Magians. Their empire was divided into satra- pies, over each of which a Mede presided. On the overthrow of the Assyrian empire, and its tripartite division into three kingdoms by Sardan- apalus I., about a. m. 3358, the Medes became the ruling nation of Asia ; and on the death of that king, the Median States, consisting of the Busians, Paratacurians, Struchates, Arizantines, Budians, and Mages, revolt from the Assyrians, and after a severe struggle succeed in maintain- ing their independence. They were at first sub- ject to district magistrates, or satraps ; but soon afterwards voluntarily submit to Dijoces as their first king, a. m. 3430, b. c. 702. Phraortes, though at first subjected to the Assyrian yoke, conquers Persia and Armenia, but is at length slain by the Assyrians. Cyaxares I., the founder of the Median army, lays a siege against Nineveh, who, though at first interrupted by the Scythian invasion, yet afterwards expels them from Asia. Astiages is dethroned by Cyrus, and the latter, > Ezek xxix. 18, 19. " I»a. xxiii. 15. » Gen. a. 2. in the year a. m. 3600, b. o. 532, unites Media and Persia, as sole monarch, which, from that time, takes its place in sacred history as tub SECOND PBOPHETIO EMPIRE. Under Cyrus, the Medo-Persian empire com- prised Media, Persia, Assyria, Babylonia, Asia Minor, Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, and the Lyd- ian empire. To these, his son and successor Cambyses added Egypt, Libya, and Cyrene, to the boundaries of Carthage. And Darius I. (Hystaspes), after quelling a revolt at Babylon and destroying the city, brings Macedonia and Thrace under tribute, and in his Indian cam- paign subjects all the countries north of the Indus to his dominions. In the civil polity, religion, and social habits of the Medes, there was an exact resemblance to those of the Persians ; while the latter greatly improved by the introduction among them of the religion of Zoroaster, the author of the Zend- avesta, or Persian Bible. (For the kings of Medo- Persia, see Tabular Views.) Note 21. Greece. — The origin of Greece is involved in fable. We date its history, how- ever, from the founding of Argos by Inachus, a Phoenician, b. c. 1856. The founding of Sicyon is attributed to his son Egialtes. After three hundred years, the throne of Inachus gave way to a second dynasty under the Egyptian Danus, son of Belus, which was styled the Belidse. Ce- crops founded Athens b. c. 1556. Theseus laid the foundation for Athenian greatness, but the Greeks remained in an extremely rude and savage state till the time of Cadmus, who founded Thebes, and by the introduction of letters into Greece, laid the basis for that literary eminence for which she was afterwards so much distinguished. From the founding of Lacedemon or Sparta by Lelex, B. c. 1516, to the abolition of royalty by Codrus, b. c. 1059 — during which interval occurred the Argonautic expedition, the Trojan war, the war of the Heraclidae, etc. — Greece had been more or less convulsed by civil war under a race of petty tyrants. This was followed by the appoint- ment of Archons, which lasted for more than three centuries. The civil wars of Greece were promotive of those numerous colonies out of which sprang Italy and Sicily. The Spartan republic under Lycur- gus followed. Then a double line of monarchy, formed of the joint reigns of the twin brothers Eurysthenes and Procles, which lasted 880 years. Macedon, founded by Caranus, b. c. 795, rose at length to great power, and, under Philip, sub- jected all the other States to its dominion. TJndor 104 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. his son, Alexander the Great, who ascended the throne in the year b. c. 335, Greece assumed the pOsitiOQ of THE THIRD PROPHETIC EMPIRE. His unprecedented career of conquests soon made him the master of the world. But, in the midst of his victories, while he tarried at Babylon, he died in a fit of debauch, in the thirty-third year of his age and the thirteenth of his reign. After Alexander's death, the Macedonian em- pire was divided among his four generals, the two principal divisions of which were Syria and Egypt. Note 22. Rome. — The Roman empire was founded by Romulus, b. c. 753 ; and though at first its territory was limited to a square mile on the banks of the little river Tiber in Italy, yet it at last extended its bounds almost to every por- tion of the civilized world. Its forms of government varied from time to time with its growing greatness, until, under the Caesars, it resolved itself into an absolute des- potism. During the first four hundred years' existence of the empire, Roman ambition, aided by an unrivalled system of warfare, had proved itself irresistible in its march of conquests. Subse- quentl}', from the period of the wars between the Latins and the Romans, and which resulted in calling the illustrious Quinctus Ciucinnatus from the plough, after a succession of vicissitudes, the tide of Roman triumphs rolled on, until, by the conquest of Egypt under Octavius Augustus, b. c. 30, the imperial sceptre extended over nearly all the nations of the earth, and Rome occupied the position henceforth of the fourth prophetic EMPIRE. The Roman empire, at this period, embraced almost the whole of Europe to the Atlantic on the west, including Britannia, Gaul, and Spain ; while its northern possessions stretched from Rhaetia in Gaul to Albania, and the Euxine and Caspian seas ; its eastern, embracing all of west- ern Asia, and Palestine in Syria ; and its south- ern, Italy, Greece, and Asia Minor, and the north- ern and northeastern portions of Africa, together with the islands of the Mediterranean Sea. SECTION X. On the chronology, etc., of the sixteen Prophets. Note 23. 1. Jonah. — Concerning the mission of the prophet Jonah, compare 2 Kings x. 32, 33 with chap. xiv. 25. He prophesied, however, prin- cipally against Nineveh, during the reign of PuL (See the Book of Jonah, particularly chap, iii.) Note 24. 2.- Amos. — He prophesied for a short period, principally against the Ten Tribes, under Rehoboam II. He was contemporary with the latter part of the prophet Jonah and the begin- ning of Hosea. Note 25. 3. HosEA. — He flourished under the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and of Jeroboam II. to the time of Hoshea; but his predictions were directed principally against the Ten Tribes for about 80 years. iVbie 26. 4. Joel. — He was contemporary with Hosea, during the reign of Fzziah. His prophe- cies were directed against Judah and Jerusalem. Note 27. 5. Isaiah. — He flourished under the four reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Heze- kiah, kings of Judah, and of Jeroboam II. to the time of Hoshea, kings of Israel, and was contem- porary with the prophets Hosea, Amos, Joel, Micah, and probably Nahum. His predictions took an extensive range, reaching not only to Judah and Israel, but also to those heathen nations, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Edom, etc. He lived to witness the captivity and bondage of the Ten Tribes by the Assyrians. Note 28. 6. Micah. — He prophesied under the reigns of Ahaz and Hezekiah, against Judah, as an assistant to Isaiah. Note 29. 7. Nahum. — The Ninevites having forgotten the preaching of Jonah, and the Assy- rians having greatly oppressed both Judah and Israel, this prophet is sent to predict the destruc- tion of their city, and the extinction of the em- pire by the Medes and Persians. Note 30. 8. Jeremiah. — This prophet ap- peared in Judah iu the thirteenth year of Josiah, and continued about forty-five years, the last five of which were spent in Egypt. He prophesied . against both these countries. Note 31. 9. Habakkuk. — He was contem- porary with Jeremiah, towards the close of the reign of Josiah, and with the next prophet. NoteZ2. 10. Zephaniah. — These two proph- ets appeared at the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, and were the last who were sent to denounce God's judgments against the Jewish nation, prior to the Babylonish captivity. Zeph- aniah also predicted the severest judgments against other nations, as the Philistines, Moabites, Am- monites, Ethiopians, Assyrians, etc. Note 33. 11. Obadiah. — He was probably contemporary with Jeremiah, and was commis' sioned to predict the total ruin of the Edomites^ OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 105 or Idumeans, the descendants of Esau, and the inveterate persecutors of the seed of Jacob or Israel, -which ruin Nebuchadnezzar soon after accomplished. Ifote 34. 12. Daniel. — He was among the first of the Babylonian captives (Dan. i. l-Y). He interpreted Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the colossal metallic image, in the second year of his reign (Dan. ii. 1) : of the great Tree (chap, iv.), in his thirty-fifth year. He had his own visions of the four wild beasts, etc. (chap, vii-viii-xi)., in the fifty-third and fifty-sixth years of his cap- tivity. He was the great chronological prophet. JVote 35. 13. EzEKiEL. — He was probably carried captive to Babylon in Nebuchadnezzar's seventh year (Jer. lii. 28). He commenced his prophetic office in Jerusalem, under Zedekiah; and now, in Babylon, he exhorts the Jews to submission, and predicts the speedy captivity of the nation, etc. JH^ote 36. 14. Haggai. — He was the first 14 prophet who appeared among the Jews after the Eestoration. He was sent to encourage them in the rebuilding of the Temple, etc. He continued to exercise his office only for the short period of four months. Note 87. 15. Zechariah. — He began his mission two months later than Haggai, and con- tinued much longer. He was sent to animate and encourage the Jews, especially their govern- ors Zerubbabel and Joshua, to finish the Temple, etc., and foretells that they shall complete it, and prosper. Note 38. 16. Malachi. — He was the last of the Old Testament prophets. He appeared to- wards the close, or very soon after the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, and was sent to testify against the wickedness of the Jews, who had now ran from idolatry and superstition into im- piety and irreligion : also, to reform abuses, and to announce the mission of John the Baptist, and the approaching first advent of Messiah. PART II, HISTORICO-PROPHETIC CHEONOLOGY. CHAPTER VII. Conflicting opinions regarding Historico- PROPHKTIC chronology. PrOPHEOIKS WITH- OUT DATES. — Prophecies, antediluvian and POSTDILUVIAN, CONNECTED WITH DATES IN COMMON TIME. SuMMART OP THE PROPHE- CIES ENUNCIATED UNDER MYSTICAL FORMS. We now proceed, in accordance with our pro- posed plan in the second part of this work, to treat of the Chronology of Prophecy. In reference to this subject, I remark, that though there are so many conflicting opinions regarding both the scTise in which those of them that are enunciated under mystical forms are to be taken (i. e., whether they are to be under- stood literally, a day for a day — or symbolically, a day for a year), and also in their application to the events with which they stand connected ; yet in either case, taken as a whole, they furnish the evidence that "the ancient of days,"' though enthroned in the heavens, and girded with eternity as with a mantle, nevertheless condescends, for the purposes of his own glory and the ediiication of his believing people, to stoop to the measures of time. I urge, there- fore, the important relation of the chronological dates of prophecy to the nature, character, and design of the events predicted, and their connec- tion with the purposes of God as historically developed in Holy Scripture, and as verified in the events of the Gospel age, as the ground of a claim to further indulgence on this subject. I do this on the ground, that the system of chronology here oflTered to the reader's acceptance, is erected on the basis of our third proposition, page 12 — viz., that both branches of chronology, the his- toric and the prophetic, are absolutely indispen- sable to a determination of the true epochs con- > Dan. vii. 22. nected with the destinies of nations, kingdoms, mid empires, and of the vicissitudes of the Church and people of God from the beginning, onward to the period when " the mystery of God" concerning them '^ shall be finished."^ I repeat, prophecy is the web, of which history is the woof. Their mutual relation to, and dependence upon each other, combine to throw light upon and to confirm both. And, " what God hath thus joined together, let not man put asunder." SKCTION I. Of those prophecies which occur without dates. I OBSERVE, then, that of the prophecies in the aggregate — I. There are several without dates. Of these, it is unnecessary to particularize. The reader will readily detect them in his perusaJ of the Old Prophets. One, only,- calls for special remark, that recorded in Gen. iii. 15 — the pre- dicted BRUISING OF THE SERPEKt's HEAD BY THE woman's seed. As this prophecy overleaps all others, so all others are merged in it. The reason which may be assigned for the absence, in this prophecy, of the specification of the precise period when it should expire, is, that "the Father," in his infinite wisdom, thought fit so to retain or "put tlie times and seasons in his ovm power" that the filling up of the prolonged interval by the events which were to form the parts of the great whole in the order of time, might not seem to interfere with the free, voluntary, and respon- sible actions of those agents, both good and bad (saints and sinners, the righteous and the wicked), who were to be identified therewith. In other words, the whole " course of time" assigned to > See third proposition, p. 12 of this worlt. OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 107 the development of God's purposes ia the natural, moral, and redeemed worlds, is so definitely " determined" and arranged by infinite wisdom and love, that no sagacity, foresight, or calcula- tion, Satanic or human, can curtail or enlarge it. The question, whether this prolonged period was to consist of precisely 6000 years from the creation and fall, or to extend beyond it — a point which I claim is fundamental to the settlement of the' chronology of Scripture — rests entirely upon which of the two versions, the Hebrew or the Septuagint, is authoritative in the premises. As I have fully laid before the render my reasons for adopting the Hebrew in preference to the Sep- tuagint version,' I now simply remark of this period — that the historic and historico-prophetic chronological indices of Holy Scripture are like a mighty river, which rushes onward in its resistless course, deepening and widening as it advances, with promontories on either side of its embankments to indicate to the voyagers their respective distances from its original source, with here and there beacon-lights to forewarn them of approaching dangers, or their nearness of approach to the haven where they would be. This holds true both of the antediluvian and postdiluvian epochs of the world's history. Take the foUowing-in illustration : First, of the antediluvian age. Here, besides the dates of the ages of the patriarchs at the birth of each, and the residues of years to their deaths from Adam to Noah, and which together make up the whole period from the fall to the univer- sal flood; Jehovah, as though jealous of his divine prescience, and in vindication of his holi- ness, justice, and truth against the abounding iniquities of that age, marks its approaching close by the first prophecy connected with a definite chronoloffical limit: "And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh ; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." ' And so, Second, of the Postdiluvian age, under which, in addition to a continuance of the patriarchal records as above, is furnished historico-chrono- logical data respecting the judges and kings of Israel and of Judah, etc., from the Deluge to the Nativity. And further, from this last event, to the close of the period called the times of the Gentiles, we also find the whole period studded with prophecies, having each a given terminus a quo, or commencing period, and a given terminus ad quod, or closing period ; some of which are designated by common, others by mystical numbers. Of the first class, those given in common or current time, the following will suffice. And the Lord said unto Abraham, " Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stran- ger in a land that is not theirs (referring to the sojourn and bondage of the Israelites in Egypt), and shall serve them ; and they shall afflict them four hundred years, , . . But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again," etc' And nothing can be more definite than the fol- lowing command to the prophet Ezekiel, to record the very day of the commencement of the seventy years' Babylonish captivity of Judah, as predicted by Jeremiah, chap. xxv. 11 ; " Son of man, write the name of the day, even the same day, the king of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same day."' » See pp. 80-49. » Gen. vi. 3. SECTION II. Of those prophecies which occur with dates, with a change in the mode of computation, from common to mystical time. II. Of the other class, or those prophecies connected with mystical time, take the follow- ing :— 1. The predicted " seven times" of chastisement denounced by Moses against Israel on account of their sins. Lev. xxvi. 18, 21, 24, 28. 2. The "seven times" dethronement and ma- niacy of the Chaldean king Nebuchadnezzar, pre- dicted by Daniel, chap. iv. 16. 3. The " two thousand, three hundred days," recorded in Daniel, chap. viii. 14-26. 4. The " seventy weeks" of Daniel's prophecy, chap. ix. 24-27. 5. The " time, times, and dividing of time,^^ spoken of by Daniel, chap. vii. 25 and xii. Y. Synchronic with this number are '' the thousand, two hundred and threescore days" of Rev. xii. 6, and the "forty and two months" of Rev. xi. 2 and xiii. 5. 6. The " thousand, two hundred and ninety days" of Dan. xii. 11. t. The " thousand, three hundred, and Jive and thirty days" of Dan. xii. 12. 8. The "five months" of Rev. ix. 10. I Gen. XV. 13, 16. ' Ezek. xxiv. 2. See on this, 2 Kings xxv. 1 ; Jer. xxxiz. 1, and lii. 4, 5. 108 OUB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLr EXAMINED. 9. The number, " an hour, a day, a month, and a year," of Rev. ix. 15. 10. The number, " six hundred and sixty-six," being " the number of a man," of Rev. xiii. 1 8 ; and, 11. The period designated in the great prophecy of Christ (recorded Matt, xxiii. 38, 39, xxiv..;. Mark xiii., and Luke xxi.), as " the times of the Gentiles; and which, as I shall show in its proper place, commences, runs parallel, and ends with the " SEVEN times " of Moses and of Daniel. Here, then, we have a series of prophetical numbers, set forth under all the terms known in the division of common or current reckoning — an hour, a day, week, month, and year, besides those given in numbers 1, 2, 6, and 11, as time, times, etc., and that in number 10, as the number of a man. Now, while we can readily understand the terms in ordinary use for the measurement of time, e. g., an hour, a day, week, month, and year ; yet, when these terms appear in connec- tion with a predicted event, and especially when an entirely different phraseology is employed to designate time, e. g., " seven times," " two thou- sand three hundred days," " seventy weeks," etc., the question regarding the application of the one and the significancy of the other is, whether they are to be understood in a literal or a mystical sense. And until this question is decided, all attempts to solve the chronology of prophecy will be in vain. This remark holds equally true in regard to either version of Scripture, the He- brew or the Septuagint. I now remark, that both the above theories have their advocates. SECTION III. An inquiry into the Scriptural rule for the inter- pretation of mystical or prophetic numbers. — The Year-Day Theory. Lei us attend, I. To the year-day theory. According to this system of interpretation, the prophetical numbers are regarded as symbolical indices or measure- ments of time : i. c., that the terms day, week, month, time, times, etc., are used in prophetic language to denote ybaes. Upon the settlement of this point, therefore, as I have said, depends the correct interpretation as to " what" (events), and what mamwr of time" are " noted" prophetically " in the Scriptures of truth." And as it would be impossible, in the absence of the requisite means to determine the question of the literal or symbolic import of mys- tical numbers, to assign to the events predicted their appropriate place in the great calendar of " the times and seasons" of Scripture, it is rea- sonable to expect that a suitable key would be provided for their interpretation. Happily, as I shall now proceed to prove from numerous precedents in Holy Writ, there is fur- nished to our hand such a key, with which to unlock the otherwise hidden meaning of these mystical numbers, clearly authorizing that inter- pretation designated as the YEAR-DAr theory. For example : Nothing is more frequent among the Old Testament writers, than to describe years under the symbol of days. Thus Moses, in speak- ing of the Patriarchs, says, " All the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years ;" ' where, evidently, by the interchangeable use of the terms " days" and " years" in reference to the age of Adam, as denoting the same thing, he furnishes a precedent for the adoption of the word day to signify a year. So Laban said to Jacob, "Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also, for the service which thou, shalt serve with me yet seven years''^ The week here, as the symbol, is used as equivalent to seven years. And so, in Leviticus, we read, " And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years."^ This had reference to the Jubilee, which occurred at the end of every forty- nine years; 7x7=49: i. e., on every fiftieth year. Hence, according to the Jews, seven weeks of days in prophetical language mean, not seven literal, but seven mystical weeks or forty-nine years, at the end of which the Jubilee was cele- brated. But, what is decisive of this point is the following direction given to the prophet Ezekiel : " Lie upon thy left side, ... for I have laid upoo thee the iniquity of the house of Israel according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days; . . . and when thou hast accomplished them, lie again on thy right side, and thou shalt bear the iniquities of the house of Judah forty days : I have appointed thee each day for a YEAR."* And so as it respects the other symbolic phrases, — the "seven times" of Lev. xxvi. 18, 21, > Gen. V. 5. ' Lev. XXV. 8. ' lb. xxix. 27. * Ezek. iv. 4-6 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 109 24, 28 ; and of Dan. iv. 16 : of the " time, times, and dividing of time,^^ Dan. vii. 25, xii. 1 ; Rev. xii. 4 : of " the times of restitution of all things," Acts iii. 21 : of " the times of the Gentiles," Luke xxi. 24 : of " the dispensation of the fulness of times," Eph. i. 10 : and of "the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his times he shall show,'" etc. ; — in respect of all of which it is con- ceded that chronological periods are meant. When viewed in the aspect of the things signified in each, they will be found to contain internal evi- dence, either expressed, as in the instance of the " seven times" of Lev. xxvi. and Dan. iv., etc., or implied, as in that of "the times of the Gentiles," Lute xxi. 24, — furnishing a rule for an exact cal- culation as to their length. For example : Un- derstanding the term " times," wherever it occurs, to signify years, as each year is to be reckoned at 360 days, when it is found connected with a specified number, as " seven," then " seven times," being equivalent to seven years oi 360 days, " each day for a year," give us a total of 2520 years as the length of the period denoted thereby. " Time, times, and half a time,'" one year, two years, and half a year, thus : 1 year 360 days 2 " 720 " i " 180 " Total, 1260 days, "each day for a year." And the undefined periods, as "the times of the Gentiles," "the dispensation of the fulness of times," etc., are to be determined by those events connected with prophetical dates, which the Holy Ghost has assigned to them. Taken as a whole, therefore, these prophetical numbers, though changed in the mode or form of computation, yet when interpreted agreeably to the law of symbols as above laid down, are nevertheless equally precise and determinable with those reckoned by literal or current time. It is in place to remark here by the way, that "for the first four centuries, the days of Anti- christ's duration given in Daniel and the Apoca- lyptic prophecies, were interpreted literally as days, not as years, by the fathers of the Christian Church. From this period to the time of Luther, with the exception of occasional glimpses into the principles of the year-day theory, they re- mained hidden from the Church. Mr. Elliott remarks on this subject — "The year-day prin- ciple scarcely broke on Luther's mind ; and he once had a curious notion of a prophetic time being equal to thirty years. . . But we find it hinted at by Melancthon. And the Magde- burg centuriators fully advocated the year-day principle, and applied it to the papacy, as also most Protestants afterwards." ' Mr. Elliott adds, that "almost immediately after Luther's publication of his Bible, it was discussed by the chief Protestant prophetic ex- positors that followed ; and in most cases the year-day principle applied to explain them." Indeed, this principle will be found to be "sus- tained by the soundest exegesis, as well as forti- fied by the high names of Mede" — of whom Mr. Elliott says, that he " was looked on and written of as a man almost inspired for the solution of the apocalyptic mysteries" — " Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, Faber, Scott, Keith, Cunning- hame. Gumming," and a host of others, and of which, to use the language of a writer of distin- guished note, we may say :. " If the old estab- lished principle of the year-day theory is wrong, not only has the whole Christian world been led astray for ages by a mere ignis fatuus of false hermeneutics, but the Church is at once cut loose from every chronological mooring, and set adrift in the open sea, without the vestige of a beacon, lighthouse, or star, by which to determine her bearings or distances from the desired millennial haven to which she had hoped she was tending." 1 Tim. vi. 5. SECTION lY. The Literal Theory. — Professor Stuart. I PASS, II. To consider the theory of those who inter- pret the above-named prophetical numbers liter- ally — i. e., that a day, time, times, etc., denote a DAT. Besides several advocates of this theory on the other side of the Atlantic, at the head of whom stands the Eev. S. E. Maitland, of Gloucester, Eng. ; in our own country, the Rev. Moses Stuart, late Professor of the Andover Theological Sem" nary, takes the lead. The following will suffice as an example of the mode of interpreting and applying this theory by the writers of this school, and of its evident fallacy. ' Elliott's Horae Apooal., vol. iii. p. 260. 110 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Take, for instance, the following persecution of the Jews, under Antiochus Epiphanes. This king having, with sacrilegious hands, stripped the Tem- ple of Jerusalem of the remaining holy vessels that had escaped the ravages of Lysimachus, the deputy of Manelius, and also defiled it by offering upon its sacred altar the flesh of swine, an animal forbidden to be offered in sacrifice by the Jewish law ; he raised against them a most severe and bloody persecution, with a view to the extermi- nation of the whole race, the destruction of the Jewish Scriptures, and the total overthrow of their ritual and worship. To this end, he sent against them an army of 22,000 soldiers, under Apollo- nius, who commenced a most brutal slaughter, taking captive and enslaving men, women, and children ; compelling the Jews to eat swine's flesh, and to sacrifice to idols ; and setting up the image of Jupiter Olympus in the Temple, offered sacri- fice thereto on the altar of Jehovah. From this circumstance, Antiochus Epiphanes is regarded by some writers, and especially by the distinguished Andoverian Professor, the late Moses Stuart, as the Great Jewish Antichrist de- noted by the persecuting " little horrH'' of Daniel's fourth or nondescript beast, chap. vii. Y, 8 ; and also, that he is identical with the " little horn" which sprang from one of the " four notable horns" into which that of the he-goat was broken, chap, viii. 7-12. With this hypothesis as the basis of his argu- ment. Professor Stuart proceeds to argue the ap- plication of the above symbols to Antiochus Epiphanes, from the following prophetic numbers applied by the Holy Spirit to the " little horn," •iz., 1260 days, 1290 days, and 1335 days.' These numbers, he afiirms, using them in a literal sense, exactly correspond with the exploits of this per- secutor of the Jews, marking the precise period within which those exploits were to transpire, and reaching to the death of the "little horn." He says that the Chaldee of Daniel, chap. vii. 25, 1'12, and the Hebrew of chap. xii. 7, "iSfD, with their kindred roots, TXS. and ^21, "mean, con- formably to their etymology, a set, fixed, or ap- pointed time. Of course," he adds, "this happily designates the year, the appointed and usual standard for the measurement of time. ' A time, times, and half a time,' therefore," he says, " mean one year, two yeais, and half a year, or 3^ years = 42 months = 1260 days," etc. And yet, the learned Professor, having appa- rently forgotten his own definition, as above, of » Dan. vii, 25; xii. 7, 11, 12. " time, times, and half a time," as laid down in page 83 of his elaborate work — viz., that it denotes " a set, fixed, or appointed time" — on inditing the contents of page 88, says : "The reader should well note here the general nature of the limitation of time. It is not specifically designated by years, or months, or days, but it is expressed in general language, viz., ' time, times, and a half.' A little more or a little less than 3|^ years," therefore, " as every reasonable interpreter must acknowledge, accord perfectly well with the general designation here, where plainly the aim is not statistical exact- ness, but a mere generalizing of the period in question." Leaving the reader to reconcile these conflict- ing chronological statements regarding the above prophetical number as best he can, we think he will agree with us, that with such a protean sys- tem of computation in the adjustment of discrep- ancies between sacred and profane history, we can congratulate ourselves at the prospect of our speedy release from all further perplexity. I would further observe in regard to this pro- phetical number, that though Josephus in one place represents that Jerusalem remained in the hands of Antiochus "three years and six months," ' yet in his Antiquities he gives only three years ; which occurring in that part of his work in which he rewrites his account of Antiochus, he professes to go over the history with " greater accuracy." ^ And it is worthy of remark, that this last date of Josephus corresponds exactly with that given in the Maccabees,' as the time during which the idol Jupiter occupied the altar of the Jewish tem- ple. How far these historical facts influenced the learned Professor Stuart to modulate his inter- pretation of the Chaldee and Hebrew of Daniel, as denoting " a set, fixed, and appointed time," we leave the reader to decide. It would be superfluous to devote additional space in refutation of Professor Stuart's assertion, that the 1290 and 1335 days, as above, relate to the time of Antiochus'? death, 46 days after his generalized period of 3| years. On his hypoth esis, upon what data can we compute this last- named period .? It were easy to show that both representations are equally at variance with his- toric facts in these premises. Indeed, until those who follow Professor Stuart's literal interpretation of these three prophetic numbers, the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days, as applied by the inspired Daniel to the " little horn" of chap. vii. 8, can prove that 1 Book of Wars. ' Antiq., 12, o. 5, § 2. » Compare Maco. i. 54, 59 with iv. 52. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Ill they have not a common commencement, and hence, that the last two numbers run beyond the first, we shall conclude of this as of the other instance, that they cannot be understood literally. I shall now proceed to oflFer several other facts, demonstrative of the fallacy of the above theory ; of which, take the following: 1. There were several other persecutors of the Jews, of the period of which we are now treating, equally entitled to be considered as the antitypes of the " little horn," with Antiochus Epiphanes. Ptolemy Philopater, king of Egypt, from the suf- ferings he inflicted upon them, and his attempted destruction of their temple, is one. As to the phrase, " the abomination that maketh desolate," it is admitted that the term '' abomination," in the Old Testament, is used to denote idolatrous worship; and "desolate," the supplanting, by its ascendency, of a divinely appointed priesthood and worship. Also, that the acts both of Antio- chus and Ptolemy partook of these characteristics. We must not, however, forget that Bajoces, the governor of Syria, was the first to innovate upon the order of succession of the high-priesthood from Aaron. Quere — Was he also an antitype of the "little horn?" But, 2. We deny the identity of the two "little horns" of Dan. vii. 7, 8, and that of chap. viii. 7—12. But as we shall have occasion in a sub- sequent part of this work to treait of this subject, we remark, 3. Immediately following the close of the per- secuting career of the "little horn" of Dan. vii. 7, 8, against the saints, that prophet predicts the universal establishment and permanent continu- ance of that kingdom which is to be " given to the people of the saints of the Most High" (Dan. vii. 22, 26, 27). But surely no such event oc- curred at the close of the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes, which transpired about the end of the year b. c. 170. The pretence of Prof. Stuart, that the above prediction was veri- fied in the Jewish Reformation which followed under Maccabeus, falling infinitely short of what tne Church is warranted to expect of that con- oanimation, proves it to be utterly fallacious. That kingdom is to break down and destroy all others. All dominions are to obey and serve its king. And, it is to stand forever. Neither of which circumstances, we affirm, was true of the Maccabean Keformation. So far from a general prevalence of righteousness — the prime moral characteristic of this kingdom — at the time of the FIRST ADVENT of Mcssjab there were to be found but a few of the devout in the whole Jew- ish nation, to hail Christ's appearance. Nor has any event since taken place at all corresponding with the prediction. In the view, therefore, of these and the like considerations that might be added, we respectr fully deny the application of the symbols of either of the above-named two little horns, as denotive of Antiochus Epiphanes, or that there is any pro- phetical number in the entire Book of Daniel, re- ferring to the commencement and termination of his career. SECTION V. Remarks on the grounds of the continued obscurity of the Prophetic Numbers, subsequently to the opening of the Sealed Vision. It is here also as important as it is interesting to the general subject, that we allude to the grounds of that obscurity which, for so long a period, was thrown over the prophetic numbers. The fact, that every predicted event, as to the tim£ of its commencement and termination, was not fully understood when first announced, was not only in accordance with the Divine plan, but is to be traced to that infinite wisdom and love, whereby the "Father'' was pleased to ^'■put the times and seasons" referring to the future " in his own power," ' during " the good pleasure of his will." Hence the adoption, in the place of the common, of the symbolic mode,' as the measure- ment of the prophetic periods. Take, for exam- ple, by way of illustration, the prophet Daniel's vision concerning the action of the " little horn which came out of one of the four notable horns" of the Grecian "He-goat," to whose career is assigned the prolonged period of 2300 days, Dan. viii. 14. Now, this "little horn" was the repre- sentative symbol of "the king of fierce counte- nance, and understanding dark sentences, who was to stand up and destroy wonderfully, and to prosper and practise, and to destroy the mighty and the holy people, in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full," etc." No marvel therefore that the ques- tion should be asked, '■'■How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sane tuary and the host to be trodden under foot ?" And, though the answer is given, "unto two 1 Acts i. 7. = See pp. 108, 109. > Dan. viii. 9, 23, 24, etc. 112 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. thousand three hundred days" at the expiration of which time " the sanctuary is to be cleansed ;" yet, says the prophet, "I was astonished at the vision, but no man understood it." It was not compatible with the Divine purpose then fully to reveal the chronological import of the above vision. It was given simply as an appendix to the preceding visions of the colossal metaUio image,' and the four synchronic wild beasts,' concerning which, taken as a whole, the command is given, " But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end : . . . for the words are closed up and sealed, TILL THB TIME OF THE END."' SECTION VI. The seal of the prophetic visions of Daniel bro- ken. — When, how, and by whom. The only remaining question regarding this somewhat intricate subject therefore is this : Has the veil of obscurity been removed from the pro- phetic vision ? Is the seal broken ? And if so, when, how, and by whom? We take the affirma- tive of this question, and, like the old prophets, " who prophesied of the grace that should come unto us ;" with " the more sure word of prophecy" as our guide, which, "like light in a dark place that shineth more and more unto the perfect day," and regarding which we are admonished to " take heed," we "inquire and search diligently" as to "what, or what manner of time the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow."' Bearing in mind then the fact, that as in exact analogy to the con- dition of the Egyptians, who were enveloped " in thick darkness, even a darkness that might be felt," while " the children of Israel had light in their dwellings,"' Daniel uttered the prediction in reference to " the time of the end" that "the wicked shall go on and do wickedly," and that none of the wicked should understand, but that "iA« wise shall understand ;"^ so here: that "vision" which, in the time of Habakkuk was "yet for an appointed time," was nevertheless, "at the end, to speak:, and not lie." Accordingly, after an interval of 658 years, from b. o. 662, the ' Dan. ii. « 1 Pet. i. 10, 11. •' lb. vii. » Exod. X. 22, 23. a lb. xii. 4, 9. • Dan. xii. 9. era of the commencement of the vision, to A. d. 96, that God who had " put the times and seasons in his own power" by commanding Daniel to " shut up the words and seal the book, even to the time of the end," issues his divine mandate to his servant John in the isle of Patmos, "Seal NOT the sayings of the prophecy of this book : for the time is at luind." ' And, if we would know how and by whom, this seal was broken, we have only to turn to the following : — " The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God" the Father, who, TILL NOW, had kept the times and seasons in his own power, '■'■gave unto him, to show unto HIS SEEVANTS THE THINGS WHICH MUST SHORTLY COME TO PASS ; and He (Christ) sent and signi- fied it by his angel unto his servant John, WHO BARE record OF THE WORD OF GoD, AND OF THB TESTIMONT OF JeSUS ChRIST, AND OF ALL THINGS THAT HE SAW." ' If, then, it is still true of Christ himself, as it respects the precise time of his second coming from heaven in clouds, yea, and ever will be, that of " that day and hour knoweth no man ; no, not the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father;"' yet now, I repeat, through the '■'■reve- lation" of "the Father" to Him of the things contained in the sealed vision (for all prophetical interpreters admit that the subject-matter of the Apocalyptic visions synchronize with that of the book of Daniel), as " the Lion of the tribe ofJudah" He " HAS PREVAILED TO OPEN THE BOOk" of the prophetic mysteries in reference to all those events connected, chronologically, with the close of this dispensation, and which were hidden from the ages and generations preceding, "and to LOOSE THE SEALS THEREOF."* SECTION VII. The symbolical opening of the visions of Daniel, a test of the ChurcKs fidelity in lea'ming their significance. A DIFFICULTY, however, here presents itself. The question very naturally arises — How, on the hypothesis of a revelation of " the times and sea- sons," as above, are we to account for ths fact that even the fathers of the first four centuries had failed to discover the true key for the inter- ' Rev. xxii. 10. » Matt. xxiv. 86 » lb. i. 1, 2. * Rev. V. 2-5. OOTl BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 113 pretation ol the prophetic numbers ? Yea, more — that, during the long interval till after the time of Luther, the true principle of their interpreta- tion was not fully discovered ? To this I reply, that agreeably to that unaJterable law of God, which reveals the divine purposes in such wise as not to appear to infringe upon the free, volun- tary acts of his areatures, the above breaking of the seals of the previously hidden visions in the Book of Daniel, was in a manner similar to that in which the visions themselves were originally revealed — viz., by corresponding symholic forms. Hence the latter — though designed as a commen- tary on the visions in the Book of Daniel, etc., with which they are synchronic — like the para- bles of our Lord, were shrouded under a veil of comparative obscurity ; but no more, I contend, than what was necessaiy as a test of the fidelity and diligent searching into what they "signified," which devolves upon all the professed followers of the Lord Jesus Christ. And, the infinite wisdom, justice, and mercy of God are all herein clearly disclosed. As with those prophetic announcements which related to the mysterious incarnation, life, ministry, suffer- ings, and death of the Lord Jesus Christ ; so with those which were subsequently revealed. All that transpired in connection with the first series was in conformity to " the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God." ' Still, the Jews, by whom " Messiah" was " cut off," agree- ably to the prophecy of Daniel,' were held respon- sible for their " wicked" act.' While the mode of the above prophetic disclosures was suffi- ciently inteUigible to those who had " the mind of the Spirit," and was in the end fully understood by them, yet were the divine purposes therein made known so far concealed behind the curtain of obscurity under that form, as to render them impervious to those who, though they " had eyes yet saw not, and ears yet heard not, neither did understand."* "Light had come into the world, but they loved darkness more than light because their deeds were evil."" So with the second se- ries. In both — hke the beautifully inimitable prismatic colors of the bow in the clouds — we discover the actual, though to us inexplicable connection between the acts of the divine sov- ereignty on the one hand, and those of the hu- man agent on the other, in the accomplishment of God's purposes. " My counsel," says he, " shall 1 Acts ii. 23. > Acts ii. 22-24 ; iii. 18-15. o Jolin iii. 19. 2 Dan. ix. 24-27. * Matt. xiii. 18. stand, and I will do all my pleasure ;" ' while the unbelieving, on their own responsibility, " stumble at that stumbling-stone.'" SECTION IX. Grounds of the ignorance, during the Apostolic age, of " the times and seasons" of Holy Scrip- ture. But it may be urged — what is on all hands admitted — that there was a comparative obscu- rity still hanging over the newly revealed mys- teries of God's purposes towards the world and the Church, in the superadded Apocalyptic visions. Pleading, then, the fact that this is a subject little studied and less understood, as my apology there- for, I beg the indulgence of the reader while I submit the following : In reference to the question propounded to Christ by. his disciples — "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel ?" and which called forth the reply, " It is not for you to know the times and the seasons which the Father has put in his own power"' — I remark, that inas- much as it was literally verified to them, in their perpetuated ignorance of " the times and seasons" during the New Testament age, down to the year a. d. 96, so it was designed specially for them. This will, in part, account for the chro- nological peculiarities of that age, on the part of the Church, in reference to the momentous sub- ject of THE TIME OF THE SECOND COMING OF Christ. With the vision of the prophet Habak- knk before their eyes, that it was "for an ap- pointed time," but that " at the end it should speak and not lie," etc. ; the New Testament writers were led by it to adopt the phraseology denotive of its signifying " the end of all things," which, accordingly, they declared to be "at hand," i. e., in their day ;* yea, that they were those upon whom " the ends of the world" — aluvuv, age — " were come,'" etc. And correctly so. But what they did not perceive (i. e., in this connection), was the fact that this "end of all things," enunciated as " at hand," was revealed on the principle that " one day is toith the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."^ Hence the mistaken apprehension, at least for the most part, of the New Testament > Isa. Xlvi. 10. « 1 Pet. iv. 1. 2 Eoni. ix. 82. » 1 Cor. X. 11. » AclB i. 6, T. « 2 Pet. iii. 8. 15 114 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Church (as in the instance of the Thessalonians), " that the day of Christ was" then " at hand." But St. Paul's more enlarged spiritual vision of the future destinies of the Church under and during this very " end of all things," enabled him measurably to correct this error. "Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at Land. Let no man deceive you by any means ; for that day shall not come, except there come a fall- ing away first, and that man of sin he revealed" ' etc. ; and this he follows up by the earnest ex- hortation to them (v. 15), "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle." Accordingly, as we know, eighteen hundred and fifty-nine years of this very '' end of all things" have continued to run on, and we have not yet reached the actual close of the entire period embraced in it. It hence is evident that neither Christ nor his apostles, in their ordinary instructions, furnished the Church, during their lifetime, with any definite data as to the precise period of the second advent, and for the very obvious reason, that they did not know it themselves. And so, from these and similar facts and cir- cumstances connected with the chronology of the period in question, — I mean the time of the sec- ond advent — with some show of plausibility, the gi'ound is almost universally taken, by the nominal Christian Church, that we are equally cut off from any reliable data upon which to determine " the TIME OF THE end" (i. 6., of the world, aiiov, age, or dispensation), under the present constitution of things ; and therefore, that to suppose a revela- tion to mortals of such a definite period regarding the Divine purposes towards the world and the Church, whether past, present, or future, is incon- sistent with the wisdom and benevolence of the Almighty. But trusting to the candor of the reader for a verdict in favor of the impartiality with which the grounds on which the above objections rest have been placed before him, while I admit the fact of the comparative obscurity in which this subject is involved, I must entirely demur to the popular inference deduced therefrom. In the first place : Who, I deferentially ask, cannot perceive, in the very existence of the 1 2 Thesa. ii. 1-8. obscurity thrown over and around this subject during the New Testament age, the strongest marks of infinite wisdom and love ? This circum- stance, properly considered, says to us of this day, "Look back — Yov, stand on an eminence of eighteen hundred and fifty-nine years. Mark, especially, all the conflicts through which the early Christians attained their triumphs — their labors, sufi'erings, persecutions, martyrdoms. Go on to the rise of Popery and Mohammedanism — see the dark ages — mark the struggles of infant Protestantism, and its subsequent decay — look at the present spread of infidelity among professedly Christian nations. Now, had the early Christians been told, in definite terms, that all this must^e- viously take place, what needless despondency and heart-sinkings must have overwhelmed them 1 — eighteen hundred years of deferred expectation; of Israel's dispersion and desola- tion at the hands of the Gentile monarchies ; and of the sufferings of the Christian Church — their tortures and martyrdoms at the hands of the Papal and Mohammedan powers ! With what wisdom and love, which mark all the Father's providence td his Church, this dark scene was kept back !" And yet, as I must insist in the next place, amid the very obscurity in which this momentous subject was involved during the apostolic age, there lay concealed the "light" of that "more sure word of prophecy," which "shining in a dark place," was destined soon to break forth with an additional effulgence upon the prophetic page. Of this, I have already spoken.' It trans- pired in A. D. 96, on the isle of Patmos, when God gave to his Son Jesus Christ, and he to the apostle John, a more full revelation of "the things which must shortly come to pass." And, that this new revelation concerning the things embraced in the previously closed vision in the Book of Daniel, was designed thenceforward for the special instruction, edification, and comfort of the Church of Christ, down to the period when "the mystery of God" should be "finished," is evident from the benediction following : " Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein : for the time is at hand" " Let it then be conceded, that the Fathers of the first four centuries of the Church failed to dis- cover and apply the true Scriptural key to the opening up of the prophetical numbers of Daniel and the Apocalypse ; and also that, from the close » See p. 112. » Kov. i. 8. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 115 of the fourth century (by the previous under- worldngs of that " falling away" from "the faith," regarding the doctrine of " the kingdom" " once delivered to the saints," and received by the early Fathers), the dark mantle o( Paul's predicted apostasy — the Papal superstition — continued to hang over the Church down to the pel'iod of the Continental and Anglican Reformation ; — still, I submit, both facts are easily accounted for. The first, on the ground that, as in the visions of St. John, the continuance of the symbolic ima- gery as the medium of representing the things signified, whether as relating to events or dates, imparted to them the same great principle of "shining more and more unto the perfect day." A mist, at dawn, still hung over them. But, of " the things signified" therein, there was a merci- ful adaptation of what, to them, was the Subor- dinate to the Essential. As their eyes swept over the extended landscape, they had, through these last disclosures, a far more perfect vision (as his- tory abundantly attests) of the future destinies of the Gentile nations, of the fortunes and final tri- umphs of the Church, and of her establishment under the " reign" of the Messiah in that " king- dom which is to break down and destroy all oth- ers, and which is to stand forever," ' than had been vouchsafed to any preceding age. The, to them, less important chronological landmarks, were ei- ther entirely overlooked, or misapprehended. At the same time, it should not be forgotten that the Christian Church of this day is indebted to Ire- nseus, bishop of Lyons, who flourished between A. D. 176 and 202, for the only consistent inter- pretation of the much-controverted name and number, 666, of the mystical beast, Eev. xiii^ 18. Finally, on this general subject I remark, that since the period of the Reformation in a. d. 1517, (the interval that has elapsed down to the present day being emphatically " the time of the bnd"), the vision having spoken to the Fathers of the first four centuries (in regard to the events or things " signified" in the Apocalypse) with a dis- tinctness of utterance unheard before, has con- tinued to sound forth its trumpet notes on all parts of '* God's great mystery" (as comprehend- ing the entire economy of his revealed purposes in relation to the physical, providential, and spir- itual dispensations, and especially of man's re- demption from the curse of sin by his restoration to "the fiist dominion" under Messiah's reign) with greatly augmented clearness. In evidence of this we may refer, without the fear of refuta- tion, to that harmony and unanimity of sentiment which have marked the labors of most of the stu- dents of prophecy, on all its most important themes ; a harmony and a unanimity which can- not be said to apply to any other one subject of divine revelation. Especially will this be found to hold true of " the times and seasons" of Holy Scripture. These, by the aid of the unloosing of the visions of Daniel through the opening of the seals, etc., of the Apocalypse, have been more the subject of careful, prayerful, diligent, and critical study on the part of the most eminently learned, wise, and pious of all the different branches of the Church of Christ, in all countries, within the last twenty-five or thirty years, than during the whole period which preceded. I Dan. ii. H. CHAPTER VIII. Scriptural account of the prophecies which RELATE to THE RISE, REVOLUTIONS, AND FALL, successively, OP THE FOUR GREAT GeNTILE EMPIRES, THE BABYLONIAN, MeDO-PeRSIAN, Grecian, and Roman, which were to bear RULE IN the earth, TO THE CLOSE OF " THE TIMES OF THE GeNTILES." SECTION I. Of their introduction upon the prophetical plat- form. The historical sketches of the Assyrio-Baby- lonish empire in Note 17 ; of Medo-Persia, Note 20 ; of Greece, Note 21 ; and of Rome, Note 22, are inserted simply to furnish a nucleus to their early origin and subsequent progress, as each was overthrown and followed by the other. But as these empires, in the purpose of the great Ruler of nations, were designed to form the four principal ruling powers of earth during a long period of Gentile dominancy over the Church and people of God, Jewish and Christian, they become blended with the historic vicissitudes of both, as set forth in the prophecies both of the Old and New Testaments. We shall now proceed to lay before the reader, I. The Scriptural account of their introduction upon the platform of prophecy. It is necessary here to premise, that the cove- nant people of God, the Jews, on account of their idolatrous apostasy and inconigible wickedness, 116 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. had beea subjected to three successive captivities, as follows : — The FIRST, that of the kingdom of Israel, transpired during the reign of Pekah, the eigh- teenth monarch of that throne, under Tiglath- Pileser, king of Assyria.' The SECOND, of the same kingdom of Israel, during the reign of his successor, Hosea, under Shalmaneser, king of Assyria." The THIRD, that of the kingdom of Judah, called the Babylonish Captivity, under Nebuchad- nezzar; and which, though commenced in the time of Jehoiakim, the eighteenth monarch of that throne, yet was not completed till the elev- enth year of Zedekiah.' The closing catastrophe of these calamities w^s the destruction of their city, and with it, of their magnificent Temple, by fire.'' Thus, then, according to the word of the Lord, " as he had said by the mouth of all his holy prophets, so was Israel cariied away out of their own land and out of his sight, to Assyria, in Halah, and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes, unto this day;"' while Judah, banished from . the land of their fathers, amid the taunts of their haughty oppressors, hang their harps upon the willows which skirt the rivers of Babylon, and, sitting down in mournful solitude, "weep, when they remember Zion.'"' But, in the early part of their captivity, we have the evidence that the covenant God of their fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, tempers his judgments for the punishment of their sins with mercy, by rendering Daniel, through his miracu- lous endowments as an interpreter of prophetic dreams,' an object of special favor and prefer- ment, both in the Babylonish and the Persian courts. Though deprived of the long-established usages of their Temple worship, yet, their proneness to idolatry having been thoroughly eradicated, and still retaining the seal of God's covenant as the elect nation, neither the terrors of a fiery furnace, nor the lions' den, availed to deter the captives, while in Babylon, from the acknowledgment and observance of the religion of the God of their fathers, the enjoyment of which was secured to them through the favor obtained by the prophet ' 2 Kings XV. 27, 28 ; and verse 29. = lb. xvii. 8 ; xviii. 9-18. ' lb. xxiv. 1-4; XX. 8-16 ; and xxv. * lb. xxv. 8-10 ; 13-17. ' Compare 2 Kings xvii. 28, with xviii. 11, » Vs. cxxxvii. 1-8. ' Dan. ii. 19-30, Daniel, under the reigns both of Nebuchadnezzar and Darius the Mede.' The civil or political affairs of the Hebrews in Babylon are here so intimately blended with the voice of prophecy, that they cannot be separated. We proceed, therefore, without further delay, to remark, that the rejection by the Jewish com- monwealth, both of the original Theocracy and a divinely appointed Monarchy, and their idola- trous apostasy under a system of government of human device, was 'followed, first, by their sub- jection to the political yoke of the Assyrian des- pot, Nebuchadnezzar. To the Judean captives in Babylon, Jeremiah is sent to proclaim the follow- ing message; "And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom that will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the pestilence, and with the famine, until I have consumed them by his hand."' The purpose of God in this, weis to inculcate in their minds the doctrinal connection between sin and punish- ment. The same great law of divine retribution was announced by Nathan to David, respecting his son Solomon — and which, as we shall see, applies as well to nations as to individuals — " If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the ROD OP MEN, and with the stripes of the chil- dren OF men."' And so, " the Assyrian" — the Sennacherib army — which invaded Judea in the days of Hezekiah, is called "the rod of God's anger ;" and " the staff in their hand" — their im- plements of war — his "indignation."* Hence, too, the prophet Habakkuk is commanded to go and proclaim to Israel, " Lo, I raise up the Chal- deans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs. They are terrible and dreadful — they shall gath- er the captivity as the sand. O Lord, thou hast ordained them for judgment : and, mighty God, thou hast established them for cor- rection."^ Yes — " established them." For, now that the commonwealth, under so many trials of their integrity to their covenant God, had proved themselves to be incapable of even retaining blessing, — above all, having revolted from their » Consult Dan. i, 17 ; ii. 1-45 ; and verse 47 ; iv. 84, 85 ; and chap. vi. ' Jer. xxvii. 8. » 2 Sam. vii. 14. > Isa. x. 5. » Hab. i. 6-12. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 117 allegiance to God politically, — at their choice, iik had condescended, so to speak, to abdicate his own, throne, to give place to a succession of earth-horn usurpers! But, in doing so, he had determined to appoint them for "judgment," and to estab- lish them for "correction." Henceforward, his people were doomed to a long period ots Gen- tile DOMINANCE AND OPPRESSION. The Voice of prophecy now speaks, as it had never spoken before. True, God, by the mouth of Moses, had long before denounced the severest judgments against them — judgments which were to be pro- longed through a protracted period under the designation of "seven times"' — in case of their disobedience. Now, however, they are left to read — though still but obscurely — their future national and political destiny, from the interpre- tations given by Daniel : — First, of Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the colos- sal image, Daniel ii. 31-41. Second, of Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the great tree, Daniel iv. 20, to the end ; and. Third, of his own visions of the four great beasts which arose out of the sea ; and of the ram and he-goat, etc., Daniel vii., viii., etc. It is, therefore, at this point in the history of the Church of God that those symbolic prophecies, set forth in the Book of Daniel, commence. The sequel will show that they reach backward to the time of the captivity under Manasseh, king of Judah ; and forward to the completion of six thousand years from the creation and fall, or to the close of the present or Gentile dispensation ; anA, therefore, that they relate to the affairs both of the Jewish and Gentile states of the Church. It follows, that a correct inteipretation of these symbolic prophecies depends solely upon an exhibit of them as a whole, both in their synchro- nic relations to each other and to the events and the periods of their occurrence, during the entire interval named above. To them, " we do well that we take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in our hearts." ' This is " the end," object, or purpose *' of our faith, even the salvation of our souls. Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto us ; searching what" (as to the things or events depicted in the sym- bolic imagery), " or what manner of time" (the periods of their respective fulfilments), " the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when he testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." ' SECTION II. Of the things denoted by the synchronic symbols revealed to Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel, chap- ters ii., iv., vii., and viii. Let us then proceed to take a view of these visions, and " what" is signified by the symbols presented in them. And, I. Of Nebuchadnezzar's vision op the co- lossal IMAGE. GOLD. Dim. ii. 31, ! SILTEE. Dan. Ii. 82. ' Lev. xxvi. 16-48. » 2 Petor i. 19. BRASS. Dan. il. 82 lEON. Dan. ii. 88 rurt IKON and part CLAT. Dan. ii. 83. Babylon. Dan. ii. 88. Medo-Persia. Dan. il. 89; v. 25-81 ; Yiii. 20. Greece. Dan. Till. 21. Rome. Dan. Ta T, 9. The Ten, Kimg dome. Dan. yiL 24 Happily, of the application of the symbols in these visions to the facts of history, especially of the past, there may be said to be little or no con- troversy. All, indeed, admit that that of the colossal image, and of the four great beasts, etc., agreeably to the interpretations given of them by the Hebrew prophet to the Babylonish captives (which interpretations transpired within the first fifty years of their captivity), have so far received a literal fulfilment in the rise and fall, succes- J 1 Peter i. 9-11. 118 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EZAMINED. sively, of the four great mouarchies which, from the period of the Babylonish captivity, were to bear rule in the earth — viz., the Babylonian, the Medo-Pkrsian, the Grecian, and the Roman. It may not, however, be out of place to furnish the scriptural grounds on which rests the appli- cation of these symbols to the above-named powers. I. First, then, that of the colossal imaoe of Nebuchadnezzar. It was composed of gold, silver, brass, and iron, and a mixture of iron and clay. Let us compare the several parts of the image with Daniel's interpretation of them. Says Dan- iel, " Thou, O king, sawest, and behold, a great image," ' etc. The Im^qe. 1. " Its Jiead was of fine gold." " Thb Intebpretation. " Thou, King, art a King of kings. . . Thou art this head of gold." ' Nebuchadnezzar was at this time monarch of Babylon, invested with unlimited autocratical power, and represented, in his own person, the kingdom over which he reigned. This is evident from what immediately follows : " After thee," says Daniel, " shall arise another kingdom inferior lo tJiee ;" i. e., to thy kingdom. This part of the interpretation, therefore, rests on the authority of the Holy Ghost. We pass to the next divi- sion of — The Iuaoe. 2. "His h-easta and his ai"ms of silver." * The Intebpeetation. "After tliee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee." 5 Silver is inferior to gold. The Babylonian empire, all history avers, was succeeded by the Medo-Persian. But, by a comparison of Dan. v. 1, 2, with chap. vii. 1, it will be seen that Scripture avers the same thing. Nebuchadnezzar having been succeeded by his son Belshazzar, in the midst of his debaucheries perceives a hand inscribing upon the walls of his palace a sentence which, when interpreted by Daniel, was as fol- lows : " God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it ;" and, " thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians." ' The third part of The Imaqb. i The Inteepbetation. 8. '■^WmleVy&nAhia thighs were of brass." ' " And another third king- dom of brass."' This denotes the third, or Grecian empire. > Dan. ii. 81. « lb. ii. 82. » lb. ii. 82. a lb. ii. 82. ' lb. ii. 89. « lb. ii. 89. = lb. ii. 87, 88. » lb. V. 26-28. which profane history asserts followed that of Medo-Persia. That the Scriptures aflBrm the same thing, is evident from Daniel's application of the symbols of the ram and the he-goat, chap. viii. 20-22 : — " The ram which thou saw- est having two horns, are the kings (kingdoms) of Media and Persia, and the rough goat is the king (kingdom) of Gbecia." So far, then, as relates to the first three of the above-named monarchies, we have the direct gui- dance of the Holy Spirit in applying them re- spectively to the first three divisions of the colos- sal image. We come now to the fourth part of The Imaqe. 4. " His legs were iron." » of The Intebpbetation. " And the fourth king- dom strong as iron."' Now, though this fourth monarchy is not ex- pressly named in Ihe visions either of Nebuchad- nezzar or of Daniel, yet of this we are certain — it was immediately to follow the demolition of the third, or Grecian power. No other power was to intervene between it and Greece. Founded by Romulus, B. c. 753, it came to maturity at the termination of the Grecian monarchy, b. c. 168, collateral evidence of which is gathered from the fact that the last stroke in its course of conquests over that empire, as history afilrms, consisted in its subversion of Egypt, b. c. 30, it being the last of the four divisions of the empire of Alexander. But more than this. The Roman was the empire existing when our Lord was upon earth. Hence his enforcement upon all of the duty, "Rerfder unto Gsssar" — the then existing title of the Ro- man emperors — "the things that are Csesar's."' And hence, also — Judea being at that time tribu- tary to the prefecture of Syria* — the fi-antic cry of the chief priests against Christ, " We have no king but Caesar!"' Finally — apprehending the powerful influence which might accrue to Christ from the miracles wrought by hini, before the people, as evidences of his Messiahship-^— the high priests and Pharisees said, " If we let him alone, all men will believe on him ; and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.'" ' These facts, derived mostly from Scripture, ren- der it certain that the fourth power, denoted by the legs of iron of the great image, was the Ro- man empire — the two legs aptly depicting its final division into two parts, those of the East and West. 1 Dan. ii. 88, * Lulce ii. 1. ' lb. ii. 40. • John xix. 15. = Matt. xxii. 21. « lb. xi. 47, 48. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 119 Then fuitlier, regarding this empire the propliet adds, respecting Tee Iuage, 5. "And his feet, part of iron, and part of day." ' The Intebpeetation. "And whoreiis thou saw- est the fmt and toes, part of potters' clay and part of iron, the kingdom shall be diiA- (fod," eto." All expositors agree that the above symbols of the image were verified in the irruption of the Gothic and other barbarous tribes from the north, their settlement in the midst of the Romans, and the final partition of the empire into the various principalities of mediaeval and modern Europe. The principalities corresponding to the ten sym- bolic toes are — 1. Lombardy. 2. Ravenna. 8. The State of Eonae. 4. Naples. 5. Tuscany. 6. France. 7. Austria. 8. Spain. 9. .Portugal. 10. Great Britain. To this division, however, we shall have occa- sion again to refer, when we come to speak of that portion of our globe called ihs ■prophetic earth, the limits of which are more clearly deter- minable by being taken in connection with the sym- . bols of the four great beasts in the corresponding vision of Daniel ; and, as indispensable to an un- derstanding of which, we must first call your atten- tion to Nebuchadnezzar's second vision — that of II. The Great Tree. — It is as follows : " Thus were the visions of my head in my bed : I saw, and behold a tree in the midst of the earth, and the height thereof was great, — it reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth. The leaves thereof were fair, and the fruit thereof much, and in it was meat for all : the beasts of the field had shadow under it, and the fowls of heaven dwelt in the boughs thereof, and all flesh was fed of it. I saw, and behold, a watcher and a Holy One came down from heaven : He cried aloud, and said thus. Hew down the tree, and cut ofi' his branches; shake off his leaves, and scatter his fruit ; let the beasts get away from under it, and the fowls from his branches. JNevertheless, leave the stump ■ of his roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field, and let it be wet with the dew of heaven," ' etc. " Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, be- cause I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof."'' 1 Dan. ii. » lb. ii. 41. = lb. iv. 10-15. * lb. iv. 9. The Intbepbetation. " It is tTum, king, that art grown and become strong ; for thy greatness is grown, and reacheth unto heaven, and thy dominion to the end of the eartli," etc.'' Daniel says of The Teee. 1. " The tree that thou sawest, which grew and was strong, whose height reach- ed unto the heaven, and the sight thereof to all the earth ; whose leaves were fair, and the fruit thereof much, and in it was meat for all, un- der which the beasts of the field dwelt, and upon whose branches the fowl of heaven had their hahitation," etc.' Here, evidently, the Holy Spirit employs the branches, leaves, and fruit of this symbolic tree to denote the splendor, extent of dominion, and power, personally, of the Babylonish monarch. Daniel further says of The Tbee. 2. " And whereas the king saw a Watcher and Holy One coming down from heaven, and saying, Hew the tree down, and destroy it ; yet leave the stumps of the roots thereof in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field ; and let it be wet The Intebpeetation. "That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wot thee with the dew of heaven, and seven TIMES shall pass over thee ; till thou knowest that the Most High ruleth in the 1 Dan. iv. 20, 21. ' lb. iv. 1 120 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till sev£n TIMES pass over him," etc' kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will And whereas they com- manded to leave the stump of the tree-roots ; thy king- dom shall be sure unto thee, after that thou shalt know that the heavens do rule," eto.» " All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar at the end of twelve months." For, having for- gotten the pious admonition of the interpreter of his dreams — " Whereupon, king, let my coun- sel be acceptable unto thee, and break ofiF thy sins by righteousness, and thy iniquities by show- ing mercy to the poor, if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity" — he blasphemously said, " Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of my kingdom, by the might of my power and for the honor of my majesty ?" Whereupon, " while the word was yet in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, say- ing, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken : The kingdom is departed from thee : and they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field," — "and seven TIMES shall pass over thee," etc' In reference to this vision we remark, that while it is evident, from the above interpretations of the symbolic imagery connected with the great tree, that it referred, primarily, to the re- markable circumstances of the personal life of that great monarch ; yet they also have a second- ary and remote bearing (as will be shown in the proper place) on events connected with the world and the people of God, which reach far beyond Mm, The way is now prepared to pass to a consider- ation, III. Of the FOUR GREAT BEASTS of Daniel's first vision, which he saw rising out of the sea.^ The first was like a lion, with eagle's wings. The second was like a bear, with three ribs in its mouth. The third was like a leopard, with four heads, and four wings upon its back. And the fourth was a nondescript beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly ; and it had great iron teeth : it had also ten horns, and among them came up another little horn, etc. Daniel's interpretation of " these great beasts, which are four," is, " that they are four kings which shall arise out of the earth." This inter- pretation, however, according to the principles of homogeneity, must bfe understood to use the terms king and kingdom interchangeably, as de- ' Dan. iv. 28. ' lb. iv. 28, to the end. » lb. iv. 25, 28. « lb. vii. 1-7. noting the same thing : e. g., speaking of " the fourth beast" or " king,^'' Daniel says, " it shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth." ' The prophetic symbols of this vision, we re- mark, were designed to furnish a more detailed view of the rise, progress, career, and final desti- nation of the four great earth-born monarchies portrayed by them, than those set forth in the above visions of Nebuchadnezzar. Consequently, we may expect to find, as we advance, a synchro- nic relation between them ; and, 1. The Lion, with eaglis wings. "The first [beast] was like a lion, and had e's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it." ' This symbol, like the head of gold of the colossal image, and of the great tree, primarily referred to the personal history of the Babylonish monarch. Thus applied, the lion, being the lord and king of the forest, symbolized Nebu- chadnezzar as " a king of kings." In its minuter parts, by way of supplying what was deficient in the others, the " plucking of the eagle's wings" indicated the monarch's humiliation, when driven out to herd among the beasts of the field ; and the " lifting up of the lion," and the " giving to him a man's heart," signified the great change in the heart of the king, on his restoration to reason, when " he blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him that liveth for ever and ever." ' It can be no objection to the synchronic char- acter of this symbol, that the above vision of Daniel did not trajis^iietiW forty-eight years after that of the colossal image. Like both the other symbols, it looked beyond its primary application to Nebuchadnezzar. The vision, as a whole, being designed, as we have said, to furnish a more detailed account of the rise, etc., of the four monarchies which were to bear rule on the earth, this first symbol, referring, as it did, to Babylon, was so far historically retrospective as to present a perfect view of that empire, past, present, and future, from the time of its first introduction upon ' Dan. vii. 28. » lb. vii. 4. 1 lb. iv. 84. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 121 the prophetic platform. The lion is therefore Bpoken of as having eagle's wings, etc., because the kingdom of Babylon was already iu possession of the empire of the world. 2. The Bear, with three ribs in his mouth. " And behold, another beast, a second, like to a bear ; and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it, between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it. Arise, devour much flesh." ' This beast symbolizes the Medo-Pebsian empire, and corresponds with the breasts and arms of silver of the colossal image. It was seen " raising itself up on one side," denoting — what history affirms — that the Persians at the first fall of Babylon were under the Medes, but that after- wards they, i. e., the Persians, should rise above them. The " three ribs between the teeth of the bear," signified the three kingdoms of Sardes, Egypt, and Babylon, which, though conquered by the Persians, did not properly belong to them. 3. The Leopard, with four heads and four wings. "After this, I beheld, and lo, another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it."" This symbol denotes the Grecian conqueror, Alexander the Great, who overthrew the Medo- Persian empire, the rapidity of his conquests being indicated by the " four wings" of the beast; while the " four heads" represent the four king- doms into which, after his death, his dominions were divided among his four generals : Cassander having for his portion Macedon, Greece, and Epirus; Ltsimachus, Thrace and Bithynia; PTOLEiir, Egypt, Lybia, Arabia, Ccdo-Syria, and Palestine^ and Seleucur, Syria. This fact, authenticated by profane history, is explicitly stated by Daniel in his interpretations of the symbols — • Dan. vii. 5. » lb. vii. 6. IV. Of THE Ram and the He-goat. This vision was revealed to the prophet as expository of the last preceding one, for which reason it is introduced in this place. Its object was, not only to illustrate and con- firm what had been previously revealed in several of the symbols of ihe first vision, but also to fur- nish important additional incidents connected with the fortunes of the Church and people of God, which they do not supply ; and of which is, 1. The Eam with two horns. This vision appeared to Daniel in the third year of the reign of the Babylonian king Bel- shazzar, when he was at Shushan in the palace, which was in the province of Elam, by the river of Ulai. " Then," says he, " I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns : and the two horns were high ; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. I saw the ram pushing westward, northward, and southward ; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand ; but he did according to his will, and became great." And "Gabriel" said to Daniel, "Behold, the ram which thou sawest having two horns, are the kings of Media and Persia." ' This symbol corresponds with the second part of the colossal image, " the breast and arms of silver," and the second beast of Daniel's first vision, the bear which was seen " raising itself up on one side ;" and furnishes positive evidence, in addition to the facts stated under the preceding symbols, that they all denote the second or Medo- Persian empire, as that which was to succeed the Babylonian. Referring the reader, therefore, to what we have said of those symbols respect- ively (see pages 117 and 121), we pass to the next symbol in Daniel's second vision. 2. The ROUGH goat, with a notable horn be- tween his eyes. Of this symbol the prophet says — " As I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and ■ Dan. viii. 1-4; 16-20. 16 122 OUE BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. touched not the ground : and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and srnote the ram, and brake his two horns : and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him. And there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand. Therefore the he-goat waxed very great, and when he was strong, the great horn was broken, and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven." ' Here it is to be noted, that this he-goat is also the subject of several remarkable mutations, of which the first is, (1.) The division of the " great horn" into ^'■four notable horns." The prophet says, "And when he (i. e., the rough goat) was strong, the great horn was broken ; and for it came four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven."" (2.) A LITTLE HORN which Came out of one of the above notable horns. "And out of one of them (i. e., of the four notable horns) came forth a little horn," etc. ^ This " little horn," says Daniel, " waxed exceed- ing great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. Yea, he mag- nified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And a host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground ; and it practised, and prospered."^ Further: The prophet represents this "little horn" as " a king of fierce countenance, and under- standing dark sentences : and his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power : and he shall ' Dan. viii. 5-8. ' lb. viii. 9. ' lb. viii. 8. * lb. viii. 9-12. destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and prac- tise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people ; and through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand ; and he shall mag- nify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many : he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes, but he shall be broken with- out hand."' Now, of these several symbols we remark. First, that the he-qoat with the notable horn between the eyes, corresponds both with the third part of the colossal image — the belly and thighs of brass — and the third beast, the leopard, in Daniel's first vision ; his four notable horns, into which the "great horn" was broken, answering to the "four heads" of that beast; while the swiftness of his course, not touching the ground, indicated the same rapidity of his conquests as that denoted by the " four wings" of the leopard. (See pages 1 1 7, 1 2 1 .) " The rough goat," says Daniel, "is the king (kingdom) of Grecia, and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first kinff."' Second. Of the breaking of the " great horn" into " FOUR notable horns," Daniel says : " Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power."' These are the same kingdoms denoted by the "four heads" of the leopard, into which the empire of Greece was divided after the death of Alexander, among his four generals, Cassander, Lysimachus, Ptolemy, and Seleucus.* But — Third. Out of one of the four notable horns or kingdoms named above, came forth the "little HORN," mentioned verse 9, " which waxed great toward the south, and toward the east, and to- ward the pleasant land." We here observe, that it is the chief object of the above vision of the ram and the he-goat, to furnish the svmbolico- prophetic origin, career, and end of this little horn. The first point indis- pensable to a right inter- pretation and application of the symbolic imagery employed by the Holy Spirit in reference to him, ' Dan. viii. 28-25. ' lb. viii. 22. " lb. viii. 21. * See p. 121 of this work. OtJR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 123 is, whether he is identical with the " little horn" which appeared among the " ten horns" of Dan- iel's Nondescript Beast, chap. vii. 8. If so, then they both relate to the papal antichrist, and the platform on which they appear is the Western Roman Empire. Then, also, they commence and end their career together. But, if they are two separate and distinct powers, appearing on, and receding from, the prophetical stage at different times, it follows that they mnst differ in their origin, in their geographical locality, in the ob- jects of their wrath, and in their final overthrow. The view herein advocated is, that these two little horns, though bearing several strong marks of resemblance in their general character and operations, are nevertheless two entirely separate and distinct powers ; that of Daniel vii. 8, relating to the Rom-an Papal antichristian scourge, raised up of God to chastise the apostate Roman or Western Church, and which, accordingly, arose in the Roman Empire from among the Ten Horns of the fourth or Roman beast ; while that of chapter viii. 9-12, etc., refers exclusively to the great Mohammedan antichristian scourge, appointed of God for the chastisement of the apostate Greek or Eastern Church, and which, accordingly, arose in Ai'abia, a part of the domin- ion of Greece which fell to the share of Ptolemy, one of the four horns of the he-goat. This, however, not being the place fo detail at length the historic verifications in proof of the positions here assumed, is reserved for a future page. It must now suffice simply to remark by the way, as having a general bearing on the subject, that the first, or Babylonian empire, and the fourth or Roman, being entirely left out of the vision of the ram and the he-goat, that vision can relate only to those of the second and third, the empires of Medo-Persia and Greece. 4. The Nondescript Beast, — " After this I saw in the night visions, and be- hold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly ; and it had great iron teeth : it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it : and it was diverse fiom all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns, " I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots : and behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speak- ing great things." ' This beast corresponds with-- the fourth par- tition — the legs of iron, and the feet with their ten toesf part of iron and part of clay — of the colossal image, and denotes the last, or Roman power, which, succeeding the Grecian, was to bear rule in the earth until the period that the saints of the Most High should enter upon and possess that kingdom of the " stone," by the power of which the colossal image was to be demolished, and the body of the beast should be slain, "de- stroyed, and given to the burning fiame ;" ^ or the period designated by Daniel as " the end of the days," when he should " stand in his lot ;" ' and in the Apocalypse as the " finishing of the mystery of God," ■• which he had spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began, be- ing the same with the period called " the fulness of the Gentiles," or the completion of 6000 years from the creation and fall. Now, respecting this fourth, or Nondescript Beast — compared with the three which had pre- ceded it — from its fierce, rampant, and destructive characteristics, it filled the spirit of the prophet with astonishment and grief.' And well it might. Its protracted career, its mutations, its unprece- dented power, and the ferocity of its acts under each, together with its final overthrow, were well fitted to produce such an efi'ect. The prophetic vision divides its history into three distinct periods, under two specific forms of development — civil and ecclesiastical. I. The first period of its career relates to its civil or political power, as Pagan ; and which, for the better understanding of the subject, we shall also distinguish as the period of its strength. By it — " dreadful, and terrible, and strong ex- ceedingly" — was subjugated the w^rhke Grecian empire that preceded it, the irpn weapons and engines of war with which it conquered, and the cruel despotism with which it ruled the world, being denoted by its " teeth of iron and ♦nails of brass."' The extent of its conquests is to be > Dan. Til. 7, 8. 3 Dan. xii. 13. > Dan. vii. 15. = lb. vii. 11 ; and Key. xviii. 8 • Rev. X. r. Mb. vii. 7, IP. 124 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. gathered from the words, '' and it devoured, and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it." This refers to the historic fact of the entire absorption, within itself, of the remain- ing authorities of all the former kings (kingdoms) those of Assyria, Persia, and Greece, by the Ro- man soldiery, who were literally the subordinate agents, "the feet," "upon which its power and dominion stood ;" for, by them were " the Caesars carried to the imperial throne, and supported in it." We are, however, specially to bear in mind what the prophet says of this beast, that " it was diverse fi'om all that was before it." By this we are prepared to enter upon a view of its versatile character, its first mutation, or change, being indicated by its having — 1. "Ten Horns." These "horns," it should be noted, formed a part of the beast. Daniel says of them, " And the ten horns out of this king- dom are ten kings (kingdoms) that shall arise," etc' Like the " ten toes" of the colossal image, they denote the Roman empire in its division into ten separate sovereignties,^ all of which, frOm the fact that they formed a part of the be^st, must appear within his dominions. This circum- stance also, taken in connection with the fact that the symbolic " toes" of the image were composed of " iron" mingled with " clay," signalizes this stage of the beast as the period op its weakness. On the other hand, the civil or political power of the Pagan beast, was continued, though sub- ject to variations in the modes of its administra- tion, not only before, but down to the time of its decimation, and onward to the period of the appearance upon the prophetical platform of — 2. "Another little horn," which Daniel in- forms us " came up among" the ten horns, etc., and that it arose " after them." ' This constitutes the second mutation of the beast, and introduces us — II. To the second period of his career, during which his politico-pagan characteristics are. ex- changed for that of the Christian, and under which his powers are, first, simply ecclesiastical ;. and second, ecclesiastico-poliiical. We annex the following illustration of this complex character of the " little horn." Here observe, regarding this " little horn — 1. That it appears upon the stage of action under the divided state, or period of weakness, of the eiiipire. The kingdoms prefigured by the " ten horns" had already attained a regal organi- zation. It makes its appearance not only "among," ' Dan. vii. 24. »Soo page 119. ' Dan. vii. 8, 24. but "after thorn," i. e., after they were organ- ized. SI. 2. All its symbolic characteristics furnish evi- dence the most indubitable that Papal Romk is its antitype. His " eyes like the eyes of a man ;" ' his " mouth speaking great things," " great words against the Most High ;"' his "look being more stout than his fellows;" "the saints being given into his hand until a time, times, and the dividing of time;"* and during that period, "his making war with and prevailing against them, wearing them out," etc. ; ^ and who " thinks to change times and laws,"' so completely delineate that mas- terpiece of Satanic device for creature self-deifica- tion, spiritual usurpation, and destructive perse- cution, as to place the correspondence of the antitypal portrait with the symbolico-prophetic original, beyond the reach of controversy. But more of this anon. With these general charac- teristics of the " little horn" premised, we now pass to the evidence furnished by the prophet, of the distinction to be made between — 3. The simple ecclesiastical attributes of this power, and that of his ecclesiastico-political charac- teristics. First, Daniel says of this " little horn," that "he shall be diverse from the first," ° i. e.i from the "ten horns" which were before him. The mark of this his diverseness from the others, in addition to those given above, is noted by the words, "whose look was more stout than his fellows."' Hence the prophet informs us that by him " there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots."' Reference is here made to the usurpation, by the Popedom, of three out of ' Dan. vii. 8-20. » lb. vii. 8, 25. ' lb. vii. 20, 26. * lb. vii. 21, 25. ' lb. vii. 25. « lb. vii. 24. » lb. vii. 20. » lb. vii. 8, 20, 24. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 125 the ten territories into which the Roman empire was originally divided, viz. : 1st, the principality of Rome ; 2d, the Exarchate of Ravenna ; and 3d, the kingdom, of Lombardy. Hence the union, by the popes, of the imperial with the sacerdotal functions. In commemoration of this alliance between the sword and the mitre,, the popes wear a TRIPLE CROWN, as emblematic of their temporal or political authority. Having presented before the reader this general view of the import of the prophetico-symbolic imagery, fii-st, of the consolidated politico-pagan career of the nondescript beast during the period of his strength ; and second, of his first mutation, or divided state of the empire among the ten HORNS or kingdoms, and with which commenced the period of its weakness ; and third, of the ap- pearance upon the prophetical stage of the elev- enth, or LITTLE HORN, among them, etc. ; we now proceed to add, in the same connection, that besides the three mutations above named of this nondescript beast, — viz., its politico-pagan, simple ecclesiastical, and ecclesiastico-political — the Holy Spirit, through the aid of other symbols, indicates still further changes of this same beast. These are — I. The Great Eed Dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads (Rev. xii. 3). n. The beast that ascendeth out of the bottom- less pit, etc. (Rev. xi. 1). III. The Beast which rose up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon the horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy, with a body like unto a leopard, his feet as the feet of a bear, and his mouth like that of a lion (Rev. xiii. 1, 2). IV. The scarlet-colored beast, with thj: woman-rider, full of names of blasphemy. " And the woman was arrayed in puiple ajid scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden ciip in her hand, full of abominations and filthiness of her fornications. And upon her forehead was a name written. Mys- tery, Babylon the Great, the mother op har- lots AND abominations OF THE EARTH." This woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the martyrs of Jesus, etc. (Rev. xvii. 1-6). V. Another beast, which came up out of the earth, with two horns like a lamb, and who spake as a dragon, etc. (Rev. xiii. 11-18). VI. The THREE unclean spirits like frogs, which came "out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet;" being the spirits of devils working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty (Rev. xvi. 13, 14). Finally, all these elements of opposition to the Christ of God of the nondescript bBast, which have signalized his persecutions of the Church and people of God under his various transmuta- tions, political, ecclesiastical, aad ecclesiastico- political, during the several stages of his career, pagan, antichristian or papal, and infidel; having slumbered for the period of the thousand years' millennial repose of the Church, are once more, and for the last time, aroused and called into action in the form of — VII. The Gog and Magog army, which under their rebel-leader, Satan, now released from his prison, shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, — to gather them together to battle : the number of whom is as the sand of the sea ; and who shall compass the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city, etc. (Rev. xx. 7-9). In addition to the above prophetic symbols from the Apocalypse, descriptive of the character and actions of this nondescript beast^ there are several others in both the Old and New Testa- ments, which, being either synchronic with, or bearing a direct relation to him, we will here introduce. I. From the Old Testament. 1. Lucifer. — This power is known by the following characteristics, as given by the prophet Isaiah : " How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer" (or, the Assyrian, v. 25), " son of the morning ! how art thou out down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations ! For thou hast said in thy heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God ; I will sit also upon the mountain of the congregation, in the sides of the north ; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High," etc. : and the prophet asks — " Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms? That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners ?" ' But this Lucifer is also the subject of a muta ■ tion ; for, adds the prophet — 2. " Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee," i. e., Lucifer, " is broken ; for out of the serpent's root shall come > Isa. xiv. 12-U; uud ver. 16, 17. 126 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. forth a COCKATRICE, and his fruit shall be a fiery FLYING SERPENT," ' etC. But there are acknowledged obscurities in this prophecy. Lowth renders the first sentence, "Rejoice not, Philistia" (instead of Palestina) ; but the Septuagint has it, "Rejoice not, ye foreign- ers (or men of other tribes), for that the rod of him that wounded thee is broken ;" and contin- ues : " For from out of the seed of the serpent shall come forth broods of reptiles (or vipers, aaviduv), and their broods shall come forth fly- ing serpents.'" This latter is obviously the correct rendering of the passage, the expression in the thirty-first veise, " thou, vfhole Palestina, art dissolved," being otherwise irreconcilable with the answer of one of the messengers of the nation, " that the Lord hath founded Zion, and that the poor of the pe. pie shall trust in it."' The next power — 3. Is the Gog and Magog army of Ezekiel, chapters xxxviii. and xxxix. This power, we remaik, though corresponding in some respects with the Gog and Magog army of the Apocalypse (chap. XX. "7-9), yet is entirely separate and dis- tinct from it. II. From the iVe«o Testament. These are — 4. The predicted "false Christs and false prophets, who should show great signs and won- ders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they should deceive the very elect," and of whom there should be " many." ' 5. The many Antichrists predicted by John. These are — First : Those who " deny that Jesus is the Christ. He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."* Second : " Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come, eXrjXvOoTa, already oome, in the flesh, is not of God ; and this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come ; and even now, already, is it in the world."' And yet another — Third: "Many deceivers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is coming — ipXOji&vov — in the flesh," not is come, as in our common version: "this is the deceiver and the Antichrist."^ Fourth : The predicted " man of sin and son OF PBRDmo^r," of the apostle Paul, called also " that wicked," " whose coming" — napovma — ' Isa. xiv. 29. » Matt. xxiv. 25 ; ••1 Jehu ii. 22. 2 lb. xiv. 82. Mark xiii. 2 ; 1 Jolin iv. 1. »lb. iv. 8. «2 1b. iv.7. per sonat appearing, " is after the working of Satan with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish :" and " who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped ; so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." ' We desire the reader here particularly to bear in mind, that the prophetic symbols from the Apocalypse, and from the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel, with those of the apostles John and Paul, are introduced in this place simply with a view to exhibit the various members of the same PROPHETIC FAMILY, no reference whatever being had to. their chronological arrangement, that sub- ject being reserved for the application of the several symbols to the periods assigned them, respectively, in the great prophetical drama. But, before dismissing the subject of the pro- phetico-symbolic visions revealed to Daniel for the instruction of the captives in Babylon, we must not overlook the fact, that there is another symbol brought to view by the prophet, whose character and work is directly the reverse of those ascribed to the colossal image, the four rampant beasts, and the ram and he-goat, together with both the little horns, and the synchronic symbols in the Apocalypse, and by the prophets Isaiah, Eze- kiel, etc., as exhibited above. That symbol, in the language of the prophet, is denominated, "A STONE, cut out without hands."' This " stone," the prophet informs us, became A GREAT MOUNTAIN, and filled the earth.'" Now, this compound symbol, the mountain- stone, holds a very intimate prophetic relation to all the others, but especially to that of the colossal image of Nebuchadnezzar, and to the nondescript beast of Daniel, under all the various sfates indicated by his several mutations as de- scribed in the preceding pages, but especially under that of the little Roman horn. On this subject, therefore, we add the following. We have said (see p. 123) that the prophetic vision of the nondescript beast divides its history into three distinct periods, under two specific forms of development, civil and ecclesiastical. The first two of these periods have already passed under review.* The same will apply to the co- lossal image, with the exception, that the eleventh or "little horn of Daniel's fourth beast, being introduced to supply a power not brought to view in that symbol, has no counterpart in the ten toes 1 2 Thess. ii. 8-10. = Dan. ii. 85. ' Dan. ii. 84. * See pp. 128, 124 of tins worlc. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 127 of the image. A consideration of the important and extraordinary mission of that mountain-stonb, ■will introduce us to the closing period of their history, that of III. Their dbstkuction. On this subject, Daniel writes thus : " Thou sawest," says he to Nebuchadnezzar, in the interpretation of his dream of the great imago — "Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces together, and became like chaff of the summer threshing-floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them ; and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth :" " the great God," through this vision of the image, " hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter ; and the dream is certain, and the interpretation theTeof sure.'" That the term " mountain," in this passage, sig- nifies a kinffdom, is evident from the following : " And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed : and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms," i. e., of the ten toes of the image, and the eleven horns of the beast ; '' and it shall stand forever." ' But this process of destruction of these earth- born powers by the mountain-stone, in its appli- cation to the nondescript beast of Daniel, as it includes several distinct actions of that " stone," which actions take effect at different stages of his mutations, we shall here present them in the order narrated by the prophet. It is here to be borne in mind that we are now treating of the destruction of the great beast by the direct agmcy of the "stone." The phrase employed by the prophet respecting " the fourth beast," which was " dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly," viz., " and it had ten horns" alluding, as it does, to the division of the once consolidated empire by the invasion of the nor- thern barbarians, is designed to indicate the initia- tive to its final overthrow. It marked the tran- sition of the empire from the period of its strength to that of its weakness? As, however, the light of prophecy bears us onward to the period of its consummated destruction, that event transpires under and during the state of the image indicated by its " ten toes," not only, but by the successive ' Dan. ii. 84, 85, 45. 1 See pp. 123, 124 of this work. 3 lb. ii. 44. judgments inflicted upon the "LirrLE horn," which begin with the close of the " time, times, and di- viding of time,"' or the 1260 prophetic years allotted to his special career, and end by the con- signing his body to the burning flame. Thus : 1. Speaking of the judgment of the "stone" upon the ten horned kingdoms of the great beast, Daniel informs us that "they had their dominion taken away," but that " their lives were prolonged for a season and time." * By this we are to un- derstand, that, though deprived of their temporal or political power under the Popedom, their spiritual dominion over the consciences of men still survived. Hence the prophet, in immediate connection with the close of the above prophetic number, says: "But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end."' " Unto the end." For — 2. This little Roman horn, the Popedom, " was to make war with the saints, and was to prevail against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom."'' This last act of judgment upon the little horn, by the descent on him of the " stone," etc., is that set forth in the following splendid imagery of the prophet. "I beheld," says he, "till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool : his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him : thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him : the judgment was set, and the books were opened."' Imagery this, well fitted to portray the porten- tous occasion for the erection of this grand assize. The prophet continues : " I beheld then, because of the words which the horn spake" — " even that horn that had eyes, and a tnouth that spake very great things," yea, who " spake great words against the Most High" — " I beheld, even until the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame " * This final destruction of the little Koman horn, therefore, being " the time'' when " the saints" should " possess the kingdom," ' Daniel adds, "I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and ' Dan. vii. 25. * lb. vii. 21, 22. ' lb. vii. 22. » lb. vii. 12. » lb. vii. 9,10. s lb. vii. 24^26. » lb. vii. 11, 20, 25. 128 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near before him ; and there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him : his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." "And the kingdom, and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall he given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose king- dom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." ' But this period of destruction holds also an important relation — 3. To the little Mohammedan Aorra, which arose out of one of the four notable horns of the he- goat. This subject is much elaborated in the apostle John's visions in the Apocalypse. Dan- iel sets forth his final overthrow in the follow- ing brief sentence : " He shall he hroken without hand."' Finally, in reference to the subject of the above prophetico-symbolic group, as denotive of the four great ruling Gentile powers of earth, — the Babylonish, the Medo-Persian, the Grecian, and the Boman, — it is objected to the above, that their overthrow, as herein set forth by the alleged agency of the " stone," cannot be, on the ground that the empires denoted by them, have long since perish- ed amid the revolutions of the past, leaving naught behind them but the historic records of their former power, magnificence, and territorial ex- tent. But if this be so, then is swept away the entire fabric of the prophetic word, and Chris- tianity is left without a shield of defence against the bold and blasphemous taunt of the infidel — " Where is the promise of his coming ?" ' That it is not so ; in other words, that the prophetico- symbolic image of Nebuchadnezzar at this moment stands erect in all its parts, is evident from the following : Originally, the first of the above-named mon- archies, in its geographical territory, population, and government, was Babylonish. Under the second dynasty, the territory and population of Medo-Persia were annexed, and the government of the two made Medo-Persian. Under the third, in like manner, the territory and popula- tion of Greece were annexed, and the government of the three made Grecian. And. under the fourth, the territory and population were com- pleted by the annexation of Rome, and the whole made Roman. These, therefore, form what, for ' Dan. vii. 13, 14, 27. » lb. viii. 25. » 2 Pet. iii. 4. the purpose of distinguishing their later from their earlier historic existence, we call the platform OF THE PROPHETICAL EARTH. Both nationally and politically, this platform attained its ultimate (which is its present) dimensions by the above process oi annexation of the one to the other suc- cessively; retaining, throughout, their original characteristics, as signified by the several symbols which denote them, as so many rods in God'^ hand for the chastisement of the apostate Church, Judaic and Christian ; extending from the begin- ning of the captivity of Israel under Tiglath-Pile- ser,' A. M. 3263, and continuing " until the mys- tery of God shall be finished ;" when " the king- doms of this world," by the direct agency of the Messianic stone in their complete overthrow, shall have become " the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ." We repeat, therefore, that the prophetic colos- sal image of the Babylonish monarch now i^xists IN ALL ITS PARTS — ffold, sHvev, hvass, iron, and clay — or the same as denoted by the four syn- chronic beasts of Daniel — the lion, the hear, the leopard, and the nondescript beast, together with those powers denoted by the ten toes of the image and the ten horns of the fourth beast, and the two little horns of the great beast and of the rough goat. These four empires began on the great river Euphrates, whereon stood Nineveh the capital of Assyria, with Babylon on the Tigris. From these two cities proceeded the power which destroyed the national existence of the Ten Tribes of Israel, and which brought the Two Tribes of Judah into captivity. And it is notorious, that both these ancient capitals, Nineveh and Babylon, together with the countries which they ruled, have now for eight centuries, down to the present day, heen under the dominion of the Turkish or Moham- medan " little horn" of the rough goat. On the other hand, the Grecian leopard, Alex- ander, added to the territory of the great image that very portion of Greece, which, in our times, has arisen out of oppression and political death, into the state of an independent kingdom,, such as it was when it first came on the prophetic stage. And, we have the Roman, still subsisting in the TEN KINGDOMS OP THE WEST, namely : Lombardy, Ravenna, Italy, Naples, Tuscany, France, Austria, Spain, Portugal, and Great Britain. And, finally, on this subject ; will any one pre- tend, that those two politico-ecclesiastical little > 2 Kings XV. 29, 80 ; xvi. 9, OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 129 horns, the Papal and the Mohammedan, do not now exist ? Let the present reigning Pontiff, Pio None of Eome, and the present Sultan of Turkey, Abdul Medsid, as the heads of these two powers, answer. CHAPTEE IX. Exposition of the mystical or prophetic num- bers OF THE books of DanIEL AND THE ApOCA- LTPSK. SECTION I. The prophetical " seven times" of Moses, Lev. xxvi., - and of Daniel, chap. iv. With the symbolico-prophetic group of the great family of nations that were to bear rule in the earth, as set forth in the preceding chapter, before us, and bearing in mind that they were specially appointed of God, as scourges in his hand for the punishment of the apostate branches of the Jewish and Christian Church — our next inquiry respecting them, relates to the important subject of the predestined period allotted to them for the execution of their work. It will here devolve upon us to adduce Scrip- tural evidence, in proof that there was assigned to their dominant career, a given terminus a quo, or COMMENCING pcriod, and a given terminus ad quod, or closing period, which last must end with the "fulfilment of the times of the Gentiles," at the expiration of the 6000th year of the world from the creation. The historic chronology of the Hebrew version, gives us a sum total of consecutive .links of only 3679 years, as in the following summary : — TEIBB. A. IL 1. From the Creation to the Flood '. . 1656 1656 a From the Flood to the death of Terah, and Abra- ham's departure from Haran 427 2083 8. Affliction aDd Bondage 430 2518 4. From the Exodus to the end of the reign of Saul . . 644 8057 6. From the death of Saul, to the Babylonish Cap- tivity. 473 8580 6. Babylonish Captivity 70 8600 7. Interval between the end of the Babylonish Cap- tivity, and the commencement of Daniel's sev- enty prophetic weeks 79 8679 Total 8679 l(, therefore, no other data connected with the subsequently revealed purposes of God in regard to the intervening affairs of the Church, and the destiny of the world under the present constitu- tion of things, is vouchsafed us, we are left in total 17 darkness as to any available knowledge of the origin, nature, design, and end, of the dispensa- tion under which we live, as also that of a large portion of the next preceding age. But, so far from our being doomed to grope our way in the midst of such darkness, it has pleased the Infinite wisdom and mercy, even from the very beginning, to proceed on the principle, "surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." ' Indeed, .when we reflect, that all God's revealed purposes in creation, providence, and grace, under the three dispensations, patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian, were to be subordinated to the unfolding of his declarative glory, through the medium of self- manifestation in the person of Christ, we are led to the discovery that the entire plan of human redemption, historically, is but the filling up of what was prophetically announced in the early promise of the bruising of the serpent's head by the woman's seed. In this aspect, the entire his- tory of the Church and of- the world, was, from the first, written in prophecy. In this aspect, the fulfilment of prophecy becomes the polar-star of hope to a perishing world. True, like the grad- ually increasing light of the sun from early dawn to its meridian splendor, so with it. Prophecy was to shine " more and more, unto the perfect day." However therefore eclipsed in its earlier stages of development, other prophetic constella- tions, as it befitted the infinite wisdom and purpose of God, have arisen within its expansive circle, until, in analogy to the completion of the solar system in the natural creation, it is now perfect in all its parts. Hence the declaration regarding it by the apostle Peter : " We have a more sure word of prophecy, to which ye all do well to take heed, as unto a light which shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your hearts ;" " " searching what," as to the great salvation therein revealed, "and what man- ner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in the old prophets," from Enoch to Malachi, " did sig- nify, when it spake beforehand of the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow," ' etc. In this view, therefore, of the design and end of prophecy, and having neither time nor space to linger longer at the threshold of these inquiries, I proceed to remark, that among the principal constellations in the prophetic firmament of which I have spoken, are those contained in the book of Daniel, and the Apocalypse, a summary of which has been given on pages 107, 108. In these ' AmoB iii. 7. " 2 Peter i. 19. » 1 Peter i. 11, 12. 130 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. prophecies are set forth, in a series of appropriate symbols, the rise, character, work, and final end of the four ruling monarchies of the world, not only ; but they form a great prophetic calen- dar OF TIMES, which, taken together, reveal to us the entire period, with their subdivisions, during which they were to perform their respective parts on the prophetic platform. But before we proceed to an exposition of these prophetic numbers in detail, it will be well to advert to a popular objection, based upon the discrepancies of those interpreters regarding them, who adopt the year-day theory. "The state- ments of Scripture," it is alleged, " are so luminous, that no doubt will arise as to the period of fixing the fulfilment of an event, if only it be accom- plished ;" whereas, the absence of universal agree- ment in reference to the time of its commencement, by those writers who discard the day-for-day theory of interpretation, furnish evidence that it has not been fulfilled at all. Hence the adoption of the following canon in regard to prophecy — that " as its purpose was to produce conviction, it must be laid down as a first principle with the inter- preter, that GENERAL CONVICTION IS THE ONLY TEST :" i. e., of the correctness of the interpre- tation. The fallacy of such a canon, however, is ob- vious from the fact, that it does not necessarily follow that a predicted event, even though an- nounced in the plainest possible terms, and though ■ it be fulfilled in the most striking form, cannot fail to produce a "general conviction" of its ac- complishment. Indeed, on this subject, what is true of the doctrines of Scripture, is equally appli- cable to the prophecies. Take on the one hand, for example, the great doctrine of the sufferings and death of Christ as set forth in the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah ; and on the other, the predicted calling of the Gentiles, and the casting away of the Jews : in other words, that Messiah was to be "a light to lighten the Gentiles," before He could become " the glory of His people Israel :" ' and I ask, whether either the one or the other of these " luminous" statements, produced a " gen- eral conviction" of their truth, even among the apostles of our Lord. So far from it, when our Saviour announced to his disciples his approach- ing sufferings and death, " How that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed," ' etc., " Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying. Be it far from thee, Lord : this shall not > Luke ii. 32. 'Matt. xvi. 21. be unto thee;"^ while the disciples of Emmaus expressed their expiring hopes of deliverance from the Roman yoke, by Messiah, in the words, " we trusted that it had been He who should have re- deemed Israel"^ It follows therefore, either, first, "that truth itself is, as to the evidence of its being truth, to be dependent upon the degree in which, when revealed by God, and rightly expounded by any individual interpretation, it is received or under- stood by the creature ;" or second, " that if any portion of prophetic truth, already existing in the mind of God, and contained in his word, be made known to an interpreter, and by him announced to the'-Church [whether it relates to an event or a dq.te], it remains no less the truth, even if no PORTION OF THE Ch0RCH BE MADE WISE TO RE- CEIVE IT." Now, clearly, the adoption of the first alterna- tive above, involves the fatal and ruinous conse- quence, that unless a doctrine or a prophecy of Scripture, when announced and expounded, pro- duces a '' general conviction" of its truth, it must therefore be false ! I need not stop to ask, if this be so ; what then becomes of the entire fabric of our common Christianity ? Let the objector name any one doctrine of Scripture that has, in any age, produced a " general conviction" of its truth ; and as to the prophecies, the same result under similar circumstances must inevitably follow. In illustration, take the 490 years of Daniel,' together with the prophecies of Isaiah and Malachi, in ref- erence to the coming of John.'' While, in regard to the former, the fulfilment of the momentous events connected with the birth, ministry, life, and death of the Lord Jesus Christ with which it was to close, do not appear to have been generally recognized by the Church, insomuch that some supposed him to be "John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the proph- ets :" * so, in reference to his forerunner, and that, though the disciples were told that he " was Eli as which was for to come."' Shall, therefore, the^ail- ure of the fulfilment of these and the like prophecies before the very eyes of the people to produce a " general conviction" of their truth, be taken, as the above canon compels us to do, in evidence of their non-accomplishment? Our blessed Lord thought otherwise. He attributed their errors in these premises, to their unbelief and hardness of heart, and loudly reproved them, because they did not " discern that time," > Matt. xvi. 22. "J^uke xxiv. 21. = Dan. ix. 24-27. « Isa. xi. 8-5; Mai. iii. 1. » Matt. xvi. 14. « lb. xi. 14, cacA oomp. John i. 19-25. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 131 Again : In regard to tlie argument derived from the discrepancies of prophetical writers, that because they differ from each other in their inter- pretations of an event or a date, therefore none of them can be right, I reply : that this is the ar- gument of Eoman Catholics against Protestants, and the argument of Jews and infidels against Christianity altogether. And, surely, every evan- gelical Christian will unite with ns in deciding that such an hypothesis, by proving too much, proves nothing at all. Indeed, in reference to this matter, the question is not, whether Horsley, or Scott, or Mede, or Faber, or Cuningharae, or Cumings,in their interpretations, is true or false — and they all differ widely on important points — but it is whether, upon Scriptural grounds, the existence of discrepancies among interpreters, or the want of general conviction among the saints, be a sufficient warrant for denying the accomplish- ment of the things they allege, whether the things predicted relate to the past, the present, or the future. It is sufficient to reply, that, as the truth of any one of the fundamental doctrines of our com- mon Christianity does not depend upon the indi- vidual sentiments of men, unless their views are found to be in accordance with the testimony of Scripture ; so in regard to the structure of proph- ecy. " To the law and to the testimony : if we speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in us." ' We may illustrate this subject by a reference to the seventy weeks of Daniel. The period of its commencement, is made to depend upon a right selection of one of three decrees. Our argument therefore is, that while the adoption of the first, second, or third, by differ- ent writers (thereby assigning for its commence- ment one of three different dates), would not prove that all were in error : the true one must be determined solely on the authority of Scripture. If the interpretation of the opening and closing events of the whole period of the 490 years of Daniel are found, on the one hand, to coincide with what the Scriptures reveal of the predicted events connected with the first "seven weeks," and on the other, with those of the last or "one week," and these events can be clearly verified by history as having transpired at the precise periods assigned to them in the prophecy, it will follow, that the time of the commencement and end of the "seventy weeks" is demonstrated. On this subject, we refer the reader to what we have offered in pages 96, 97 of this work. > Isa. viii. 20. With these preliminaries, therefore, to our pro- posed exposition of the mystical or prophetic numbers of Daniel and the Apocalypse, we shall proceed to consider them in accordance with the following arrangement, dividing them into two classes, the greater and the lesser. 1 . Of the first class, are the " seven times" of Moses, Lev. xxvi,, and of Daniel, Dan. iv. 32, which commence and end together, and reach down to the close of " the times of the Gentiles," or the present age. 2. Of the second class, the shorter, all ^re either merged in and form a part of, or else run parallel with, the longer, and serve both to illustrate and confiim it. 3. Not one of either class of these prophetic numbers, will be found to extend beyond the close of this dispensation. Predicted events there ai'e, which are to follow the close of the present age ; those events in which all the leading prophecies converge, and form the great era of crisis to the Church and the world ; but these belong to a SHORT UNCHRONOLOGICAL PERIOD, extending from the close of the 6000th year of the world, to the time when "the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ." Let us consider, then, of the first class of prophetical dates : 1. The twice repeated mystical number of the " SEVEN times" of Moses and Daniel. The first was announced by Moses, on the completion of the Tabernacle, one year after the Exode,' a. m. 2514 (b. c. 1490); the second, by the prophet Daniel, in the thirty-fifth year of the Babylonish captivity,^ a. m. 3555 (b. c. 577), making an in- terval of 913 years. This period of "seven times," I now remark, when deciphered by the rule for the interpretation of mystical or prophetic numbers, understanding the term " times" to signify years, as each year is to be reckoned at 360 days, "each day for a year,"' seven times 360, give us a total of 2520 years. If then, first, we can verify hy history, the pre- cise year of the world from the creation, accord- ing to the sacred Hebrew annals, when this re- markable prophecy commenced its course of fulfil- ment ; and if, second, the 2520 years denoted by it, when added to said year of the world from the creation, amounts precisely to the sum total of 6000 years ; it will follow, that our exposition of ' Compare Exodus xiii. with chap, xl, 82, 88, aud Lev. xxvi. " Compare Dan. i. 1 ; 2 Kings xxiv. 1 ; 2 Chr. xxvi. 4-7, with Dan ii. 1 ; and tliese, with Dan. iv. 29-33, 84-87. s See pages 108, 109 of this work. 132 OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. it is in accordance with " the mind of the spirit" in its original announcement. In our exposition of these two collateral num- bers, we shall take the ground, that the ^^ seven times''' in the vision of the great tree, Dan. iv. 3, is expository of the " seven times" of Lev. xxvi., not only, but that they are typical in their char- acter, which circumstance furnishes the evidence of their parallelism with the latter. Also, that their starting chronological point is coincident with X. M. 3480, b. c. 652, and that they close with the.period designated in the New Testament as " THE FULNESS OF THE GeNTILES." ' There is, however, an objection, on the one hand, involving a denial of the typical import of the seven times in the vision of the great tree, according to our interpretation of it ; and a dif- ference in the mode of determining the time of its commencement, on the other. Reserving our reply to the above objection, till we reach the " seven times" in the vision of the great tree, Dan. iv. 32, we shall first call the attention of the reader to the last-named point, in connection with, 2. The "SEVEN times" of the Great Lawgiver and prophet Moses, Lev. xxvi., verses 18, 21, 24, and 28. That eminent writer and interpreter of prophecy, the Rev. George Stanley Faber, in his comments on this mystical iiumber as recorded in Dan. iv. 32, tells us that his treatise "rests upon the grand master-number of seven times" etc. (Pref., p. viii.), which he denominates " the sacred calendar of prophecy," and " the times of the Gentiles ;" ' and, as he interprets days for years, he makes the whole term of the seven times to comprehend a space of 2520 years. It is scarcely necessary to remark in this place, that as the two phrases in Leviticus ahd Daniel, as deno- tive of a period of time, are collateral, it matters not which of the two passages a writer may choose to select. The main point is, the data adopted in determining the time of its commencement. On this subject, Mr. Faber's theory in reference to the seven times is, that it is' " produced by the duplication of three times and a half:"' in other words, that the 1260 days (years) of Daniel and St. John form but a moiety of said number ; and, at first view, it must be confessed, that it is in- vested with no small degree of plausibility, twice 1260 years amounting to precisely 2520. The reader, however, must here be admonished, that to sustain the above hypothesis, every thing de- pends upon the correctness and clearness of the ' Rom. xi. 25. » Sac. Cal. of Proph., vol. i. pp. 40, 41. = lb. Pref., p. viii. period at which Mr. Faber's prophetic "seven times" commences ; this being adopted by him as A KEY to determine the commencement of the last half, ov 1260 years of the 2520, together with the 1290, and the 1335 days (years) of Dan. xii. 11, 12. The application of thi^ key to the last-named prophetic numbers, must be deferred to a subse- quent page. We are now concerned only with the question of the commencement of the seven times. This period, Mr. Faber fixes at the birth of Nebuchadnezzar, b. c. 65'7; for which, he oflfers in proof the words of Daniel, in interpreting that monarch's vision of the colossal image, chap, ii., viz. : " Thou ait this head of gold," which he applies, not to the kingdom of Babylon as a whole, but simply to the lifetime of that king. He then says of this period, "That if chronology should evince it to be impossible, that his [Nebuchad- nezzar's] birth could have taken place in the year in which he places it, his arrangement of the prophecies will at once be convicted of error, and will be rendered altogether untenable."^ Now, that the data on which Mr. Faber relies for the commencement of this period, is an "error,'' and hence " untenable," we think will appear from the following : 1. In the first place, in the vision, the term king, is evidently used to signify kingdom. For Daniel commences the application of the vision thus : " Thou, king, art a king of kings, for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, etc. ; thou art this head of gold ; and after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another kingdom of brass, etc.; and the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, etc. ; and in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom," etc. (Dan. ii 37-44). Here it is obvious, that the expressions " king" and " thou," as spoken of Nebuchadnezzar, do really relate to his empire; and that the terms king and king- dom are, in like manner, used synonymously for the other three empires. The interpretation, therefore, of Mr. Faber, oflFends against the plain and evident meaning of the context. But, 2. In the next place : Mr. Faber adopts the following canon of interpretation in support of his theory : " The principle of homogeneity" he tells us, " must never be violated ; or, in other words, homogeneous prophecies must be interpreted ho- mogeneously." (Pref., p. viii.) On this principle, therefore, if the head of gold be Nebuchadnezzar, congruity requires that his son, Evil-Merodach, » Sao. Cal. of Proph., vol. ii. p. 87. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 133 should be the kingdom to arise after him, and inferior to him ; and the remaining princes, down to Belshazzar, the remaining kingdoms. But, in direct violation of his own canon, Mr. F. inter- prets the remaining portions of the image — the silver, brass, and iron of three empires — entirely irrespective of any individual kings. This, how- ever, the learned writer justifies, by a reference to Ptolemy's famous astronomical canon, and tells us, that though the rudiments of the three suc- cessive empires had long been in existence, we have no concern with them till they are made constituent parts of the metallic image.' But, Mr. F. here overlooks the fact, that this would equally destroy his principle of dating from the birth of Nebuchadnezzar; for, while his father occupied the throne (which, by the way, he usurped, by slaying bis master), Nebuchadnezzar could not have been king. And further : as Mr. F. makes Nebuchadnezzar to have been fifty years of age when he was associated with his father in the twenty-first year of his - reign, he must have passed thirty years of his life, without any title even as an heir apparent to the throne. Nor is this all. If Nebuchadnezzar, as Mr. F. aflSrms, was fifty years old when he ascended the throne of Babylon, it would make him to have attained the great age of ninety-five years at the time of his death, — an age, as Dean Prideaux observes in his remarks on Archbishop Usher's error in re- gard to his marriage, very unlikely for such to live, who usually waste their lives, both by luxury and fatigue, much faster than other men. Finally, on this subject, 3. Mr. Faber's authority for making Nebuchad- nezzar fifty years old when he came to the throne, is on the ground that Berosus, the Chaldean his- torian, relates oThim that he was kv rjXeKig, (ar- rived at manhood.) But, unless some further expression had been likewise used, as, " who had long since arrived at manhood," or the like, the above construction of iv TjXeKiM, we submit, is altogether gratuitous. Prideaux therefore trans- lates it, " who was still a youth ;" Whiston, in his translation of Josephus, " who was then but young;" while Josephus, when speaking of his death, says, " he was an active man," etc. These facts, therefore, taken in connection with Prideaux's correction of Archbishop Usher's error, viz., that Nebuchadnezzar married, not Astyages, but her sister (whose daughter Amythtis became, ac- cording to Ctesias, the wife of Cyrus),' which marriage took place after he was sole monarch ■ Sao. Cal. of Proph., vol. ii. p. 8. ' See LempriJro, and also Brown. of Babylon ; and, while it chronologizes well with that writer's observations, it forms, if not positive evidence, at least the highest moral improbability of the correctness of Mr. Faber's theory. While, then, we agree with this generally ac- curate writer in his interpretation of the seven times as a mystical number denoting 2520 years; and that they form the basis of " the great cal- endar of prophecy'' or " the times of the Gentiles ;" and also of their typical character in the vision of the great tree, etc. ; we are reluctantly at issue with him, on the subject of the mode of determin- ing the period for their commencement at the birth of Nebuchadnezzar. The data, as we con- tend, for determining the terminus a quo, or com- mencing period of that number, rests on the ground already stated, viz., that their starting chronological point is coincident with A. m. 3480, B. c. 652, and that they close with the period designated in the Nfew Testament, as " the ful- KESS OF THE GeNTILES." The announcement of this prophetic number by Moses, Lev. xxvi. 18, etc., is as follows : " And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then will I punish you seven times /or your sins," etc. Eemarking simply by the way, that in verses 18 and 21, the word '■'■more" is added to the proph- ecy, there is, I observe, a need-be that I advert to several difficulties, which are alleged as fatal to our hypothesis, that these " seven times" are a mystical number, denotive of a definite period. 1. The Rev. Edward Winthrop, A. M., in his "Premium Essay on the Prophetic Symbols," when discussing " the seventh law" of symbolic interpretation, says, that " the seven times, in the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus, are not sym- bolical" — that " the prophecy is exclusively ver- bal," etc. : and affirms that " the Hebrew yaia, in Lev. xxvi. 18, 21, 24, 28, is equivalent in that connection to sevenfold, and denotes, not the duration, but the intensity of the judgments which the Lord would inflict upon the Israelites in case of their disobedience." Also, that in the above passage, " there is no word in the original, to cor- respond with the English word ' times,' as there is in Dan. iv.," ' etc. To the same effect are the objections of two other eminent writers, the Right Rev. Bishop Hopkins and Dr. Jarvis, who con- sider the seven times in Leviticus, as representing simply " punishment in degree, and not in dura- tion ;" ' that is, " that it might as well have been ' See Premium Essay— 104, 105. ' " Two discourses on tlie Second Advent of the Redeem- er, with special reference to the year 1843, by John Henry Hopkins, D. D., Bishop of the Diocese ofVermont." 134 OUE BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. rendered sevenfold. . . a superlative to denote intensity,'" etc. But with deference to the above authorities, I would submit, that to consider this term as signifying sevenfold instead of seven times, would involve a needless tautology, inasmuch as this four times repeated seven times of chastise- ment of the Israelites, follows a previous catalogue of threatened judgments against the nation of Israel and Jndah, " if they should despise God's statutes and abhor his judgments," viz., "terror, consumption, the burning ague, sorrow of heart, prolonged captivity,"' etc.; all of which they were to suffer from the commencement to the end of the " seven times" chastisement. Then, in addition to this, is the following evidence, that the text is obviously intended to signify a chrono- logical period. I refer to the frequent use of the same mode of speech both in the Old and New Testaments, in respect of all of which, it is con- ceded, that a chronological period is meant. Thus, we read of the " seven times" that was to pass over the exiled Nebuchadnezzar during his period of maniacy, Dan. iv. 16 ; of the " time, times, and dividing of tim£," Dan. vii. 25 ; xii. 1 ; Eev. xii. 14 ; of "the times of restitution of all things," Acts iii. 21 ; of " the times of the Gentiles," Luke xxi. 24 ; of " the dispensation of the fulness of times," Eph. i. 10; and of "the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his times he shall show," etc., 1 Tim. vi. 15. Wherefore, then, it may be demanded, should not the " SEVEN times" in Leviticus be understood of a chronological period also? It stands con- nected with the last communication which " the Lord spake to Moses in the Mount Sinai to the children of Israel," when they should " come into the land which God gave them," of what would be the consequences of their departure from him, both as to " degree'' and " duration." But it is objected to our ihterpretation, 2. That if the " seven times" is to be understood of a prophetical number, as it is four times re- peated, it should be computed at 10,080 years. On this subject, the Rev. Dr. Jarvis, speaking of the " seven times" of Leviticus, affirms that it is "precisely analogous" to the duty enjoined by bur Lord to " forgive" an offending brother not only " seven times," but " seventy times seven .''' And adds, " Would it not be thought a most ex- traordinary interpretation, that Peter meant to 1 " Two Discourses on Prophecy : with an appendix, in ■which Mr. Miller's scheme, concerning our Lord's Second Advent, is considered and refnted. By Samuel Farmar Jarvis, D. D. ; LL. D." » See Lev. xxvi. 14-17, 28-89. ask. Shall I forgive my brother 2520 years ?" ■ To this I reply, that if the " seven times''' in each passage are " piecisely analogous," then there is a slight error in the learned Doctor's arithmetic. If the " seven times" and the " seventy tim^s seven"' in the latter passage refer to the same thing, it would make Peter to exercise the grace of for- giveness for the period of 25,200 years ! So much for the confounding of a term expressive of a chronological date, with a similar term when used to enforce a moral duty, that of forgiving an of- fending brother, not for " seven times" only, but for " seventy times seven," or 490 times, if re- peated so often. Still it is urged, that the repetition of this num- ber in Leviticus, from the peculiar phraseology employed, " seven times more," demands on our hypothesis that the period be four times repeated. To this I answer, first, that the word " more" is only used twice, the first time in verse 18, in which case it is used to express the prospect ot continued punishment ; and the second time in verse 21, where the degree of their punishment is regulated by their sins. And, in the next place, that the four passages in question, are but a repetition of the same period, is evident from numerous Scrip- tural precedents, in which " a repetition of the same thing" is most unquestionably employed to express but one period or one event. For instance : seven years of famine was revealed to Pharaoh by "a repetition" of dreams, which Joseph, in interpreting to him, declared were "one," and added, " and for that the dream loas doubled unto Pharaoh twice, it is because the thing is established of God, and God will shortly bring it to pass."' The seventy years' predicted captivity of the Jews, was reiterated foicr oi five times by different proph- ets,' and no one pretends that on that account it was to be as often repeated. And so, Peter's vision of the great sheet let down from heaven, was three times repeated to him,' without any one ever supposing that he had three separate visions. And the apostle John, under different forms, re peats the mystical 1260 days or years of Daniel four tim^s over ; ^ and in the twentieth chapter of the Apocalypse, the one thousand years are re- peated SIX times ; when no one has ever pretended that he referred in either case, to more than one period. With this explanation and defence of the terms of the prophecy in hand, we are now prepared to inquire, at what year of the world this mystical ' Two Disc, on Prophecy, etc. ' Matt, xviii. 21, 22. a Gen. xii. 82. * Isa. xxiii. 15-17 ; Jer. xxv. 11,12. » Acts X. 9-16. « Kev. xi. 2, 8 ; xii. 14 ; xiii. 5. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 135 number, the " seven times," commenced. And here I observe, First, that the predicted puuishment with which this period was to open, was the following : " And I will break the pride of your power "^ Now, that this refers to the captivity under Manasseh, king of Judah, is clear. For, even after the dis- memberment of the kingdom under Rehoboam and Jeroboam, though one division, the ten tribes, was made tributary,^ the other, the two tribes, retained their independence till the period of the captivity under Manasseh. With that event, the ten tribes having previously lost their Mng^ the " pride of their power was broken ;" so that, though Manasseh, on his repentance, was restored to his throne,'' and several other monarchs fol- lowed him — Anum, Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah^ — down to the time of the Babylonish captivity under Nebuchadnezzar, they have never regained their national independ- ence " from the day of the kings of Assyria unto this day."° Again, Second. In confirmation of the above, by com- paring the particular sins on account of which, according to the above prophecy, this punishment was to be inflicted on Israel,; with the crimes spe- cifically charged upon the Jews as instigated by Manasseh' — together with the instruments ap- pointed by Providence to bring upon them these judgments — it will be seen that they all point to the captivity under Manasseh, as the time for the commencement of this period.' And hence. Third, the reference, by the sacred writers, to the sins of Manasseh, as the cause of the cap- tivity of Judah, long after that event.' And finally, on this subject, Fourth: The prophet Hosea, more than one hundred years before, pointed to the captivity under Manasseh, as the occasion of the loss to Is- rael and Judah of their national independence. "And the pride of Israel (the ten tribes) doth testify to his face : therefore shall Israel and Ephraim (the principal tribe of the ten) fall in their iniquity ; Judah (the other division) also SHALL PALL WITH THEM :" '° whilc the prophct ' Lev. xxvi. 18, 19. " 2 Kings xvii. 1-18. 8 2 Kings xviii. 9-13. * 2 Chron. xxxiii. 12, 18. 5 2 Kings xxi. 1, 19 ; xxii. 1 ; xxiii. 81, 36 ; xxiv. 8, 18. « Neh. ix. 32. ' Oomp. Lev. xxvi. 14, 18, 27, with 2 Kings xxi. 9-13 ; nnd Lev. xxvi. 1, 2, with 2 Kings xxi. 2-8 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 2-11. 8 Comp. Isa. X. 5, 6, with 2 Kings xxi. 10-14 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 10, 11 ; Neh. ix. 32. 9 2 Kings xxiii. 26, 27 ; xxiv. 1-4; Jer. xv. 1-7. " Hosea v. 5. Isaiah had predicted the very time when these events should take place — "And within three- score and five years, Ephraim shall be broken, that it shall not be a people.'" This prophecy of Isaiah was made early in the reign of Ahaz, king of Israel, a. m. 33'7'7.' But the captivity of Judah, under their king Manasseh, took place in the year a. m. 3480, or the year b. c. 652. This result is obtained by deducting the prophetic number of " seven times" or 2520 years, from a. m. 6000. If to this it be objected, that Manasseh reigned fifty-five years, and that the captivity under him occurred at an earlier date; my reply is, that though this be admitted, yet its chronological commencement, in a national point of view, is carried forward at least thirty-eight years, that being the interval between his restoration to his throne on his repentance for his sins, and the above-named date. The former, or his personal captivity, was but a prelude to the latter, or the captivity of the nation, according to the statement 2 Kings xxi. 11, 12, "Manasseh hath made Judah also to sin with his idols : therefore, thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Behold, I AM BRINGING (i. e., by the personal captivity of their king) such evil upon Jerusalem and Judah, that whosoever heareth of it, both his ears shall tingle." Hence, while the Almighty could par- don the individual sins of the wicked Manasseh on his repentance, yet, nationally, Judah, re- penting not of their idolatry, etc., though instigated by that king, was punished by the final loss of their independence, together with that of Ephraim, as above. The following is our chronological adjustment of the above events : 1. The prophecy of Isaiah vii. 8 was given in the early part of the sixteen years' reign of Ahaz ; say, in the second year,' a. m. 3 8 '7 7. 2. The captivity of Ephraim under Esarhad- DON transpired in the twenty-second year of Ma- nasseh, he (Esarhaddon) being, at that time, king of Babylon as well as of Assyria.'' 3. The same year Judea was subjugated by Esarhaddon, who, having captured Manasseh as he lay hid in a thicket, bound him in chains of brass, and carried him a captive to Babylon.' Now, counting fourteen years from the second of Ahaz, and adding the twgnty-nine years intervening > Isa. vii. 8. ' lb. = Compare Isa. vii. 8, with 2 Kings xvi. 2. » Compare 2 Kings xvii. 24, and Ezra iv. 2, 10, with 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11. " 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11. 136 OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. reign of Hezekiah,' down to the end of the twen- ty-second year of Manasseh, and it gives you the sixty-five years of Isaiah's prophecy from the second year of Ahaz, A. M. 3377. It results, that though "Judah fell with Ephraim" in the same year, the 22d of Manasseh, A. M. 3442, 65 years after 3377, according to the prophecy of Hosea, chap. v. 5, and Isa. vii. 8 ; still, the judgments which the Almighty then began to bring upon " Jerusalem and Judah," were not consummated till about thirty-eight years after," viz., a. m 3480 I .. „_ Add years b. c 652 [ to NATIVITY add A. D 1868 Add 1868 gives a total of 6000 Total 6000 I have only to say in conclusion, that the ex- position given above of this prophetic number is . confirmed by the internal evidence of the prophecy itself. It announced that the land of Israel was to lie desolate, so long as its inhabitants should remain scattered among their enemies of the Gen- tile nations. But, they have been for many cen- turies, and they still are, a people scattered and peeled, a hissing and a by-word to their Gentile enemies. The Moslem crescent still peers above the dome of the Mosque of Omar, erected on the very site of their once magnificent temple in Je- rusalem. And their present captivity, according to the prediction of our Lord, Luke xxi. 24, is to continue "till the times of the Gentiles be FULFILLED," at the end of the six thousand years from the creation. With this remarkable era coincides, precisely, the chronological termination of the " seven times," or 2520 years of Leviticus, commencing with the captivity under Manasseh, a. m. 3480, as demon- strated above. But I have said, II. That the "seven times'' of Daniel, chap, iv. 16, run parallel with the "seven times'' of Leviticus. This prophetical number occurs in connection with the following prophecy concern- ing Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in connec- tion with, and as a part of, that monarch's vision of the great tree, in the following words : " Let his heart be changed from man's, and let a beasfs heart be given unto him; and let seven times pass over him,'' etc. — i. e., 2520 years. To this view, however, the Rev. Mr. Winthrop objects that the ^' seven times, in Dan. iv. 16, are not predicated of the symbol, but of the person symbolized ;" to which he adds, " this is demon- > 2 Kings xviii. i. a Seo 2 Kings xxi. 11-18. strably the fact from what is said in that passage, 'let his heart be changed,'" etc. From this, he argues, " a man's heart on the one hand, and a beast's heart on the other — that is, human sym- pathies and those of the brutes — cannot be pred- icated of a tree, and therefore this part of the prophecy is not symbolical, but verbal," etc.: ac- cordingly, this writer discovers a sudden " transi- tion from the symbolical to the verbaV in the vision between verses fifteen and sixteen. " The language here used," he adds, " is not applicable to the tree which is the symbol, but only to Nebu- chadnezzar, who was the person symbolized ; and it is over him, and not over the tree, that the seven times are said to pass," etc' But we reply : Admitting that the above is true as it respects the " tree," which was commanded to be " hewn down" V. 14; yet how are we to separate the seven times maniacal " portion" of Nebuchad- nezzar "with the beasts in the tender grass of the field," from his browsing around " the stump of his roots'" which were to be "left in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass,'' during that period ? Here, obviously, the sustenance provided for the exiled monarch during his madness, was to continue to thrive around the roots of the remaining stump of the tree, " wet with the dew of heaven," coeval with the " seven times'' that were to " pass over him." The vision, though a part of the symbols relate to the " tree," anotbtr part to the " stump of his roots,'' and another to "Nebuchadnezzar," is symbolic throughout, and can only be rightly interpreted by being preservetl in its integrity as a whole. Did our space per- mit, it might, if we mistake not, be easily shown that Mr. W.'s " laws of symbolic interpretation," rightly applied to this vision, would abundantly confirm what we have set forth. But we come now to consider the objections raised against our view of the typical character of the "seven times" in Dan. iv. 16, 32. Both Mr. Elliott, in his "Horse Apocalypticae," and Mr. Faber, adopt the same view, which may be stated in few words, to wit : That the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar during seven times, is' typical of the seven times or 2520 years of " the times of the Gentiles," etc. To this Mr. Faber adds, that his restoration to reason is typical of the holy millennial state. " Surely then," as one writer properly observes, " the period previous to his insanity ought, in strict analogy, to be typical of a period of holiness likewise." Mr. Faber, evi- dently, in this particular, carries the vision beyond > Prem. Essay, pp. 108, 104. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 137 its due limits, for it is obvious that the mystical number of seven times en/is with the raonavch's recovery of his reason. What follows in verses 34-37, is sirnply Nebuchadnezzar's statement as an historical verification of the literal fulfilment of that predicted period, in his own person. But the same writer adds in regard to this theory, " There is another consideration which ren- ders the whole figment eminently contradictory and illogical ; for the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar was an interval in which he was shorn of power, and at the end of it restored to it : but the seven times of the Glentilesis a period during which they exercise power over and against the Church, and at the end of it are scattered to the winds 1" ' A sufiBcient answer to this may be found in the fact, that if Nebuchadnezzar during his insanity " was shorn of power," still that power was exercised by proxy, in the person of his son. Evil Merodach, who filled the throne during his insane exile there- from. And so, Mr. D. N. Lord, in his recently pub- lished volume on "the coming and reign of Christ," referring to this theory of Mr. Faber, says, " It is utterly the work of his fancy. No such symbolic period is mentioned by the prophet. The only instance in which the expression 'seven times' is used by him, is in Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the great tree," etc., which he hmits solely to the personal history of that monarch." In reply, it may be observed, that if the circumstance of the number seven times as used but once in the Book of Daniel, is to be admitted as an argument against its typical import, then, I respectfully submit, by proving too much, it proves nothing. Other in- stances of a similar kind occur in Scripture, for example, Rev. xx. 1-6, where we find the first and only direct and positive statement of the doc- trine of the first resurrection, etc. Shrill we there- fore reject the doctrine on that account ? If it be said in reply, that the same doctrine is to be gathered from other portions of the New Testa- ment, we grant it. But the same fact will apply to the seven times, which was enunciated by the prophet Moses more than nine hundred years before Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the great tree, of which fact, by the way, neither of the above writers, in their animadversions, have taken any notice. We now hasten to our exposition of the typical import of the seven times under consideration. It regards the evidence of its coincidence in point » See luvest. of Proph., vol. iv. pp. 296-800. " Coming and Keiga ot'Clirist, pp. 272, 273. 18 of time, with the other. Now, it is admitted that, primarily, the seven times had reference to the dethronement and madness of the Babylonian monarch, in whom it was literally fulfilled.' But, that its connection with the personal history of Nebuchadnezzar was intended to adumbrate, sym- bolically, that statfe of political and moral maniacy which should characterize all human governments under the dominion of the princes of this world,' during the entire period denoted by that same monarch's vision of the colossal image," and of Daniel's corresponding visions of the four wild beasts which dwelt beneath the branches of the great tree,'' and of the ram and rough goat,' etc., may be clearly shown from their collective internal evidence. As introductory to our exposition of this sub- ject, I must premise, that the predicted " seven times" maniacy of Nebuchadnezzar is to be taken in connection with his vision of the great " tree" in chapter iv., as expository of its chronological import. The height of that tree reached to heaven, and the sight thereof to the ends of the earth ; iu addition to which, the Watcher and the Holy One from heaven commanded, that after the tree was hewn down, etc., the stump of the roots thereof should be left in the earth, even with a band of iron and of brass, in the tender grass of the field, etc., circumstances which, symbolically speaking, tend to impress the mind with the idea of pro- longed duration, as well as of strength. Now, with this idea corresponds Daniel's inter- pretation, first, of the colossal image, the different parts of which (symbolic of the successive periods which were to mark the rise and fall of the four great monarchies, which, with their subdivisions, were to bear rule in the earth — ^the Babylonian, Medo- Persian, Grecian, and Roman) — on the great principle of annexation of the one to the other, were indissolubly cemented together, there- by preserving the imagp intact, from the period denoted by the head of gold, down to that signi- fied by the feet of mingled iron and clay. Thus, Daniel, in his address to Nebuchadnezzar, says : " Thou art this head of gold ;" i. e., the kingdom,^ Babylon, of which he was the " head," already existed. The period of its sway had already com- menced. Then the prophet adds, " And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee 1 Dan. iv. 28-88. « 1 Cor. ii. 6, 8. « Dan. ii. * Dan. vii, 1-8, iv. 21. » lb. viii. 1-12. ' That the terms Mng and kingdom are used interoiiangb- ABLT to denote the same thing, see Dan. vii. 17 : " The four great beasts are four kings," etc. ; with ver. 23, " The fonrth beast shiill be the fourth kingdom," etc. 138 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. (the silver) ; and another third kingdom of brass, etc. ; and the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron," etc. He next informs us of the period of their overthrow, and of the agent by whom it shall be accomplished : " And in thb days of THESE KINGS (oT kingdoms) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall break to pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for- ever." And this, he declares, is to be effected by the glorious mission of the Messianic " stone cut out of the mountain without hands," by the smit- ing of this colossal image on the " feet that were of iron and clay," which act of smiting, Daniel informs us, shall take place at " the time of the end'^ of these prophetic monarchies, or in " the last days" when " the kingdom, and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High."' Second. That the vision of the four wild beasts etc., of Daniel, synchronize with the four com- partments (the gold, the silver, the brass, and the iron, etc.) of the colossal image, is admitted on all han'ds. The Scriptures themselves apply them as descriptive of the four empires already spoken of.' It is unnecessary, therefore, to add any thing fur- ther on the subject of the prolonged period occu- pied by them in the world's history. The sacred writers, whose statements are confirmed by the authentic records of profane annalists, suflBciently attest their remote origin and their present exist- ence. And now, having already determined the chronological commencement of the mystical " seven times" of Leviticus, it only remains that I adduce the evidence in proof of the parallelism therewith, of this " seven times" of Daniel. The prophet Jeremiah, I submit, settles this point. Having assigned the same causes for Is- rael's captivity with those predicted by Moses,' he says : " And I will cause them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth, because of Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, king of Judah, for that which he did in Jerusalem," ^ to wit — " "Walking contrary unto the Lord, and refusing to hearken unto him." ' So, of the punishment as predicted by Moses and Jeremiah, — oppression, captivity, bereavement of childrqn, etc. " And I will fan them with a fan in the gates of the land ; I will bereave them of children ; I will destroy my people, since they will not return from their 1 Dan. vii. 14-27. 2 Dan. i. 1 ; oomp. v. 1, 2, with vii. 1, viii. 20, and viii. 21 ; John xix. IS ; Matt. xxii. 21 ; John xi. 47, 48. » Compare Lev. xxvi. 21, etc., with Jer. xv. 4-9. * Jer. XV. 4. » See comp. as ahove. . . I will cause them to be scattered into all the kingdoms If the earth," ' etc. We have seen how this scattering took effect on Ephraim, or the ten tribes, agreeably to the prophecies of Hosea and Isaiah, under Esarhad- don, in the twenty-second year of the reign of Manasseh. We have also seen, according to the same prophets, that Manasseh was carried in chains to Babylon the same year ; but that, in consequence of his restoration to his throne, the chronological commencement of the "seven times" punishment of Judah was placed at a later date. On this subject, I now remark, there is a pecu- liarity in the structure of the sacred history of this chronological era, different from any other. For example — it is recorded of Zbdekiah, the ffth in the line of succession from Manasseh, that, having rebelled against Nebuchadnezzab, king of Babylon, he was carried a captive thither, in the eleventh year of his reign. This was the commencement of the seventy years' captivity. But, instead of connecting the chronological com- mencement of that captivity with the name of either Zedekiah or Nebuchadnezzar, the sacred penman, in recording the event, thus writes : — " Surely at the hand of the Lord came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight for the sins" — mark, not of Zedekiah, etc., but " for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did ; and also for the innocent blood that he shed ; for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon"^ And this was done "according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by his servants the prophets," i. e., by Moses' and Jeremiah.* In harmonizing the above apparently conflict- ing statements, therefore, it is only necessary to view the inspired historian as merging the Judean captivities under Zedekiah, etc., at the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, into, and thereby identifying them with, those judgments which, though begun in the twenty-second year of Manasseh, yet were not reckoned to have commenced, chronologically, till soon after the death of that king, viz., a. m. 3480, or the year b. c. 652. The design of the things "noted" under the typical number of the " seven times" maniact of the Babylonish king Nebuchadnezzar, was to furnish a more detailed account of the events which were to transpire, down to " the time of the end," • See oompar. as above. " Compare 2 Kings xxiv. 8, 4, with xxi. 10-16. = Lev. xxvi. * Jer. iv. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 139 than those brought to view in the parallel " seven times" of Leviticus. That number relates exclu- sively to the punishments of the " holy nation," Israel and Judah, for their sins. This includes, in addition, an account of the sufferings of " the saints" — the followers of Christ under the new dispensation, during the parallel interval of their subjection to the iron rule of the same despotic powers which, as rods in God's hand, has af- flicted his ancient rebellious but still covenanted people, though under other forms — those of the Papal and Mohammedan little horns. Arguing, therefore, from the homogeneity of the thing indicated by the typico-symbolic maniacy of the Babylonish king, and its duration as denoted by the mystical " seven times" that were to pass over him, — perched upon the higher branches of the prophetic tree, with the stump of its roots left in the earth, bound together by a strong band of iron and brass, — the eye of faith can admire and adore the infinite prescience which, in this twofold prophetic form, has marked out for the instruction and edification of "the faithful in Christ Jesus" of these " last perilous times," the vicissitudes, and the political and ecclesiastical oppression of both the literal and spiritual Israel, during the prolonged coincident periods of 2520 years, and of the final deliverance and triumph of both, when ^'■•Israel shall be gathered again ;" when " Judah shall look upon him whom they pierced, and mourn ;" and when Messiah's Gentile Bride shall lift up her voice and exclaimj "Behold, he cometh with clouds 1" And now, in conclusion, look ! That very mys- tical " seven times" of Moses which opens in burn- ing wrath against God's covenant but sinning people, and which have not yet fully run their course, closes beneath an azure sky, athwart which is the rainbow of promise. In this very twenty- sixth chapter of Leviticus, Jehovah says of his people, " If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers," etc., "then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also ray covenant with Abraham will I remember ; and I will remember the land." And, as though some might imagine that the enormity of their sins, in so long having "despised God's judgments and abhorring his statutes," would debar them forever from his mercy, " Yet for all that," saith their covenant God, " when they be in the land of their enemies, / will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to breaJc my covenant with them • I am the Lord their God. But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out ot the land of Egypt, in the sight of the heathen, THAT I MIGHT BE THEIR GoD : I am the Lord." ' " The vision is for an appointed time ; but at THE END it shall speak and not lie ; though it tarry, wait for it ; because it will surely come, it will not tarry." ' In regard to the period denoted by " the end" of the vision, the reader has only to bear in mind our Lord's prophecy (Luke xxi. 24), that the Jews were to be " carried captive into all nations, and be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Then "thev shall confess their iniquities," etc. SECTION II. A final argument derived from the " seventy weeks of Dan. ix. 2i-2l, demonstrating that the two chains of Sacred Chronology, the historic and the prophetic, give a sum total of 5991 years, as the true year of the world from the creation and fall. The following closing argument on the subject in hand, is ofi'ered, not that, at least in our view, the exposition given of the mystical number of the " seven times" of Moses and of Daniel, is not sufficiently conclusive in the premises ; but to shut the door against any further cavil, in deter- mining the present era of the world from the creation and fall. It is derived from the prophetic "seventy weeks" of the prophet Daniel. It proceeds on the ground of the admission, first, of a possible defect in what we have offered in refer- ence to the prophetic date of the " seven times," or 2520 years, in the preceding chapter. And second, thatjn the consecutive links of the historic chain, in leference to the interval between the commission of Ezra to return to Jerusalem in the seventh year of Artax. Longimanus, a. m. 3679 (b. c. 453), and the year a. d. 37, besides that several of the Scriptural dates in relation to that period are conjectural, there is also the greatest confusion among chronologists, in regard to the period between the close of the Old Testament canon and the Nativity, both of which defects this prophetic number rectifies. The position here assumed is, that (these ais crepancies to the contrary notwithstanding) the above prophetic "seventy weeks" of Daniel en- a ble us to bridge the chasm, in a manner which > Lev. xxvi. 40-45. a Habak. ii. 8. 1-40 OUR BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. excludes all further controversy. It was given expressly to enable " the wise" of the New Testa- ment age to "understand" the precise time of Messiah's manifestation, etc., to Israel. This period of " seventy weeks," or 490 years' (with perhaps additional clearness, comp.-ired with the " seven times" of Moses and of Daniel), is marked by a given terminus a quo, or commencing period, and a given terminus ad quod, or closing period, the interval being divided into three unequal parts, viz. — " seven weeks," " threescore and two weeks," and " one week." I shall now proceed to show. First. That the COMMENCEMENT of this "seventy weeks," or 490 year.s, coincides precisely with the commission given to Ezra in the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, a. m. 36'79 (b. c. 453). Second. That, during the sixty-nine of the sev- enty weeks, reckoning from their commencement, transpired, 1st, the birth of Christ, a. m. 4132; and, second, His manifestation to Israel, a. m. 4162. And, Third. That with the last week of the seventy, closed the 490 years, a. m. 41C9, which- period includes, first, the crucifxion of Christ in the midst of the week ; and second, the opening of the gospel door to the Gentile world at its termination. First. The prophet, having informed us that Jehovah had ^'^ determined^ upon his people, and ' That this prophetical number cannot possibly be under- stood of so inany literal days, is evident from the fact, that no event, such as that described by the prophet, can be shown to have signalized the close of such a period. While, on the other hand, the events therein set forth as •verified in the history of those times, can be shown to have har- monized exactly with the above divisions of the "seventy weeks" into distinct periods, when understood as denoting weeks of years, i. e., " each day for a year" (Ezek. iv. 1-6), or 490 literal years. This places our rule of interpreting prophetic or mystical time on the yewr-day theory, on a solid and immovable basis. ' Much controversy has been elicited as to the import of the term " determined,''^ in this passage. It occurs but once in the entire Hebrew Scriptures. It is derived from the Hebrew 'JtO Chatbak (in the niphal forms passive, t31riSll Nechtah). Rabbinical usage assigns to it but one signification, that of cutting, or cutting off, in the sense of separating from. In the Chaldeo-Rabbinio Diet, of Stook- ius, the word " OJiathah" is thus defined : " Soidit, abscidit, oonsoidit, inscidit, exoidit" — to cut, to cut away, to cut in pieces, to cut or engrave, t& out ofiT. Mercerus, in his "Thesaurus," furnishes a specimen of Rabbinical usage in the phrase, ohathikah shelbasar — " a piece of flesh," or " a cut of flesh." He translates the word as it occurs in Dan. ix. 24, by " prseoisa est"— was cot off. In the literal version of Arius Montanus, it is translated, " decisa est" — was oht off ; in the marginal reading, vifhich is grammatically correct, it is rendered by the plural, " de- ci-'is sunt" — were cut off. Tn the Latin version of Julius and Tremellius, nechtak is -endered, " deoisse sunt" — were cut (ff. upon the holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins," etc., proceeds to specify the data with which to commence the Again : In Theodotion's Greek version of Daniel (which is the version used in the Vatican copy of the Septuagint, as being the most faithful), it^is rendered by ^tcTjitiBriiav — " were cut cfff' and in the Vatican copy, by TtTjiTivTat — " Jiam ieen cut." The idea of cutting oflT is pur- sued in the Vulgate; where the phrase is, "abbreviatse sunt" — ?uiiie Ieen shortened. Thus, Chaldaic and Rabbinical authority, and those of the earliest versions, the Septuagint and Vulgate, give the single signification, to this verb, of onrrrNO off. But the question is, from what are the seventy weeks or 490 years to be separated or cut off? The answer is, from that period during which was to transpire those events which were to follow the cutting off of Messiah, by the "fin- ishing" or filling up of the nation's sin, etc. Daniel bad erroneously supposed, that with the end of the seventy years' Babylonish captivity, would terminate the desolation of the sanctuary, etc. Hence the "prayer and supplica- tion, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes," which he so earnestly presented before God in behalf of " the city which is called by his name,", then buried' in ruins. (Dan. ix. 1-19.) But, while offering this prayer, in order to correci this error of the "greatly beloved" prophet, Gabriel if- commissioned to make known to him more perfectly, "tht things noted" in his previous revelations. "I am now come forth," says he, " to give thee skill and understand- ing . . . therefore understand the matter, and considei the vision," etc. Now, true, there were several visions, prophetically set- ting forth the sufieriugs of Daniel's people for a prolonged, period, under the dominancy of GmtUism — two to Nebu- chadnezzar, Dan. ii. iv,, and two to Daniel, chap. vii. viii,, etc. But the last three were addled, simply to explain more in detail all that was actually comprehended in the fihst. In this sense, therefore, the expressions above, " under- stand the matter, and consider the vision," are to be taken as a direction of the prophet's mind to a retrospection of " the things" premousVy " noted in the Scriptures of truth" a« a whole; having done which, Gabriel proceeds to unfold to the mind of the anxious prophet, a series of events rela- ting to his people and the holy city, which had not been brought to Ught in either of the preceding revelations to him. These events were, — the advent of Messias as a sin-atoning sacrifice; the consummation of the national sin of the Jews by rejecting him, etc., which was to result in his Criioiflxion ; and the opening of the gate of salvation to the Gentile world ; — all of which were to transpire within the above seventy prophetic weeks, or 490 years. This prophecy of the seventy weeks, therefore, is to be viewed as an appen- dix to the preceding revelations ; and hence, to be sepa- rated or cut off from them, as a matter " determined" by the Infinite Disposer of all events. Then, these events of the seventy weeks accomplished, the Jewish nation, having "finished their transgression''' by the rejection and Crucifixion of Messias, as a punishment for their sin, was doomed to a prolonged, state of suffering and captivity under the dominancy of Gentilism ; thus merging the whole periodmUfsaieA. in the above visions ^rior to the commencement of the seventy weeks, into that which follows qfter their close, thus : " And the people Of the prince that sliall come, shall destroy the city and the sanc- tuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." . . . " Also, for the overflowings of abominations he shall make it desolate, evenuntilihe consummation, and that determined, shall be poured upon the desolate." (Murg. Desolator.) OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 141 seventy weeks. " Know therefore, and under- stand," says he, " that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah shall be seven weeks. . . the street shall be built again, and the walls, even in troublous times.'" Now here, all is plain. The prophet furnishes us with data by which to de- termine when this first "seven weeks" of the " seventy" began. It was at the issuing of a cer- tain decree,' for the rebuilding of the city, street, and wall of Jerusalem, given to Ezra in the sev- enth year of the Persian monarch, Artaxerxes Longimanus, a. m. 3679. The following will con- firm the historico-chronological commencement of the " seven weeks," from this point. By com- paring Ezra vii. 6, 7, with Neh. v. 14, it will be seen that Ezra labored under his commission thir- teen years from the seventh year of this Persian king, and Nehemiah twelve years from the twen- tieth year of the same king, which, together, make twenty-five years, to the thirty-second of that monarch's reign. But this last-named year marks Nehemiah's return from Jerusalem to Persia (Neh. xiii. 6). Admitting, then, that we have no definite data by which to determine the length Dan. chap. ix. 26, 27. On this subject, the learned Hengs- tenburg, who enters into a critical examination of the text, says: "The very use of the word, which does not else- where occur, while others, much more frequently used, were at hand — if Daniel had wished to use the idea of de- termination, and of which he has elsewhere, and even in this portion, availed himself— seems to argue, that the word stands from regard to its original meaning, and represents the seventy weeks in contrast with a determination of time (en platei) as aperiod cut off from subsequent duration, and accurately limited." (See Hengs. Cliristology of the 0. T., vol. ii. p. 801 ; "Washington, 1839.) ' Dan. ix. 25. ' There were no less than four edicts issued in reference to the Holy City, by different Persian monarohs. The question therefore is, from wliich of tlie four are we to date the comraenoement of the seventy weeks ? The answer is, that the first edict was issued in the first year of Ctehs, as recorded Ezra i. The second, that of Dauihs, recorded Ezra vi. But, as both these related to the temple ahne, neither of them could have been the " commandment" specified above. The third edict wa-s that issued by Aktax. Longi- manus to Ezra, in the seventh year of his reign ; and the fourth, that given to Nehemiah by the same monarch in his twentieth year's reign. But by comparing Ezra vii. with Neh. ii., it will be seen that this was nothing more than a personal and private commission to an individual, to go and carry out with speed and vigor what Ezra had begun under a previous edict, the third, which is unquestionably the one from which to date the commencement of the above command. It is recorded, Ezra, chap. vii. 1-7, "Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes (Longimanus), king of Persia," to "Ezra the son of Seraiah, etc., . . . the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the Lord his God upon him. Atid there went up some of the children of Israel, and of tlic priests, and the Levites, etc., unto Jerusalem, in the seventli year of Artaxerxes the king," etc. . of this period of absence, yet, by consulting the events recorded in chap. xiii. 4-9, and verses 16-18, we may reasonably presume it to have been not less than twenty-one years, which, added to the twenty-five years above, gives us forty-six years ; the peiiod concerning which, the Jews declared in Christ's time (John ii. 20), the temple was in building, etc. Still, this leaves three years wanting, to complete the " seven weeks" or forty- nine years. It is supplied by Nehemiah's return to Jerusalem " even in troublous times" (chap. xiii. 7), where, commencing anew to finish the work he had left incomplete, and to reform those dis- orders occasioned by the conduct of Eliashib the high-priest, though the length of time to the pe- riod of his death is not specified, yet it could not have been less, and probably not more than three years. Thus is verified the period denoted by the first " seven weeks" or forty-nine years of the 490. Second. I now pass to the next division of the seventy weeks. To the " seven weeks" above, Daniel adds in immediate connection, "and three- score and two weeks," which together made sixty- nine weeks or 483 years, '■'■from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jeru- salem," a. m. 3679, "UNTO Messiah THE Prince,'' A. M. 4162. The reason of the above division of the sixty-nine weeks into two parts, is obvious. The Holy Ghost foresaw that, at the public inau- guration of " Messiah the Prince" into his minis- try among the Jews, by his baptism at the hand of John in Jordan, other evidence than that of the miraculous descent of the Divine Spirit upon him in the form of a dove, even though accom- panied by that voice from heaven which proclaim- ed, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased," ' would be required, in the event of their rejection of him as such, to render them without excuse. Hence, at the end of the 483 years, to the miraculous attestation of the manifestation of Jesus to Israel, is added historico-chronological data (with which the Jews as a nation were as familiar as with household words), in proof of his claims as their Messiah. All they had to do was to reckon backwards from a. m. 4162, by deduct- ing therefrom the above sixty-nine weeks or 483 years, which would throw them back upon the precise date in Daniel's prophecy, when was issued " the commandment" to Ezra by the Persian mon- arch in his seventh year's reign, " to restore and to build Jerusalem." Thence onward, they could, with equal certainty, verify the other events in- cluded within the first "seven weeks" or forty- ' Compare Luke iii. 23, with 21, 22. 142 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. nine years of Ihe 483, to the finishing of the tem- ple, A. M. 3128. But again : as to the period of the birth of Christ. This is not noted in the prophecy of the seventy weeks, except by implication. The bur- den of that prophecy was, to point out Jesus to us as he who was " to maJce an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity" etc.,' as a sin- atoning sacrifice. As such, all the patriarchal sacrifices from Abel onward, together with the Levitical sacrifices, priesthood, etc., pointed as types to him, the great antitype — " Christ, an HIGH-PRIEST forever after the order of Melchise- dek." Now, the Jewish high-priests entered upon their oflSce at the age of thirty years, and as " no man took that honor upon himself but he that was called of God, as was Aaron ;" so we read of Jesus as " the high-priest over the house of God," who was to " oflfer up himself once for all" for the sins of his people, that, "when he began to be about thirty years of age," ^ was bap- tized, i. e., publicly manifested or inducted into his ofiice. All that was neces^ry therefore was, to deduct this thirty years from a. m. 4162. This places the Nativity 453 years " from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem," to the thirty-third year of Herod the Great, a. m. 4132. I have only to add, Third — the "one week," or seven years, as an integral part of the seventy. " And after three- score and two weeks shall Messiah be ctit off. . . and he shall confirm the covenant with many for ONE WEEK : and in the midst of the week, he shall ' Dan. ix. 24. ' Some contend, but erroneously, that Christ was only twenty-six years of age at the time of his baptism. This arises from the adoption of the current chronology of a. d. 4004, as the year of Christ's UHh. Thus, in the reading of Bagster's and other Bibles, we shall find that they adopt A. D. 8, as the year when Christ appeared among the Jew- ish doctors at Jerusalem. Better, however, to adopt the statement of the evangelist St. Luke, chap. ii. 48, where we read, " And when Jesus was twelve years old, they (his parents) went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast," etc. But, in further confirmation of this fact, I remark, that Ciirist's birth could not Iiave transpired, as is generally alleged, on the twenty-flfth of December. The circum- stance of the shepherds being in the fields watching their flocks by night ou that auspicious occasion, certainly better accords with the season of autumn or spring. In the latter case (which is the most probable), whether we suppose the Nativity to have occurred towards the close of j. p. 4709, or tlie commencement of j. p. 4710 (within which limits it demonstrably occurred), the year thirty of our Lord, proves coincident with j. p. 4740, at which age we have, according to the above prophecy, the expiring of the 483 years from the commencement of the seventy weeks. Better again, I repeat, to follow the statement of the evangelist St. Luke, chap. iii. 23, and verses 21, 22 : " And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age," was " baptized," etc. cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease," ' etc. ; "seven weeks," " tliree-scoie and two weeks," and " one week," equal seventy weeks or 490 years. As the first seven of the seventy weeks were a terminus a quo, or commencing period, to the 490 years ; so the last or one week was a termi- nus ad quod, or closing period, to the same num- ber. Now, upon the very face of the terras here employed, the plain and obvious meaning of the passage is, first, that the phrases, "shall be cut off," and " shall cause the sacrifice and the obla- tion to cease," express, and are intended to refer to the same thing, viz., Messiah's " making an end of sins, and making reconciliation for iniquity," etc., by the sacrifice of himself upon the cross. Then it is to be specially noted, second, that while Messiah was to devote the whole week to the " CONFIRMATION of the covenant with many," his being " cut off" by crucifixion was to transpire, not at the commencement, nor at the close, but "in the midst," or middle part of,' the "one week," i. e., half way between the first and seventh year of it. I now proceed to show, that the entire period of Christ's ministry, from his baptism at the end of the 483 years as above, to his crucifixion, could not have exceeded three years and six months. In proof of this, it is only necessary to observe that our blessed Lord, during his ministry, was present at four different Passovers.' The Pass- overs, Josephus expressly says, were kept on the fourteenth of the Jewish month Nisan (which ' Dan. ix. 26, 27. 2 And yet, to serve the purposes of a favorite prophetico- chronological theory, Cruden's Concordance, under the word " MIDST," is used to furnish an imposing array of pas- sages to prove that "in the midst of," may signify, through- out the entire period of, etc. And hence, that the prophet meant to inform us by these words, " in the midst of," that Messiah was to be cut off at the dose of the lait, i. e., the seventh year of the " one week I" And so, on this protean process of Scriptunvl herme- neutioB as applied to the above passage, was made to hinge the entire theory of the late Mr. Miller's computation of the prophetic numbers. Starting from a. d. 88, as the alleged completion of the 490 years from the seventh of Ar- taxerxes Longimanus, and fixing upon it as the focus oi his theory, by a tortuous process of adding to and sub- tracting from the various links in the double chain of chronology, historic and prophetic, both hefare and tf/fec that event, Mr. Miller and his coadjutors produced a sys- tem of no inconsiderable plausibility, in proof that the year A. D. 1848 completed the 6000th year from the creation and fall. This theory, however, falls to the-ground, if it can be shown that the cutting off of Messiah took place precisely three years and siix months from tlie year 483 of the 490. See above. » See John, chap. ii. 13-17, v. 1-9, and vi. 4 ; Matt xxvi. 17-80. OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CBITICALLY EXAMINED. 143 answers partly to our months of March and April), and always on the day of the pascal full moon, the sun then entering Aries at the instant of the vernal equinox. Now, Christ was crucified on the day of the last of these four Passovers,^ that day being the one before the Jewiili Sabbath, and corresponding with our Friday. It follows, that Christ's death having transpired during the cele- bration of the last Passover, his baptism, in view of the incidents of his life as recorded by the evan- gelists, must have taken place about six months prior to his presence at the first Passover of the four, as recorded by Luke and John.' Assuming this, then, as the maximum period of Christ's ministry, it places his death by cruci- fixion, chronologically, precisely where the proph- et Daniel places it, viz., "iw the midst of" the " one week ;" and, added to the last year of the sixty-nine weeks, it brings us down to the 486th year and six months of the 490. There yet re- mains, therefore, three years and six months to complete that number. A due consideration of this important part of the above " prophecy, will go far to expose the fallacy of the plea so zeal- ously urged by some, that the cutting off of Messiah by crucifixion took place on the last year of the " one week," or at the close of the 490th year. For, the great object of Christ's manifestative ministry was, the confirmation of the covenant during the whole " week." Now, by " the cove- nant" here (for there is but one covenant), refer- ence is made to that predicted by Jeremiah, chap. xxxi. 31 : " Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israeli and with the house of Judah ; not ac- cording to the covenant that I made with their fathers," etc. The apostle alludes to this same covenant, Heb. x. 15-18. This is none other than the covenant Abrahamic, which stipulated the opening of the two-leaved gate of gospel grace to Jew and Gentile. " In thee, and in thy seed," saith God to that patriarch, " shall all the fam- ilies, KINDREDS, AND NATIONS OF THE EARTH BE BLESSED."' Accordingly, in "confirming this covenant with many for one week," first, our blessed Lord's personal ministry was confined exclusively to the Jews. " I am not sent" says he, "-but to the lost sheep of the house of Israeli * The same was true of his apostles, under their first commission. " Qo ye not unto the Gentiles ; neither into any city of the Samaritans enter ye ' See John xviii. 28, and xix. 14. 2 Luke iii. 21-28 ; John i., etc. 3 God. xxi. 12 ; Acts iii. 25 ; Gal. iii. 8. « Matt. XV. 24. not ; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,"' etc. This confirmatory process of the covenant extended over the first three years and a half of the " one week." Whilst " the twelve" and the "seventy'' dispensed the word of life throughout Judea to the " many," of Jesus himself it is recorded that, though the scribes, priests, and Pharisees reviled and blasphemed, yet the great mass of " the common people" — the '■'■many" — "heard him gladly."" Now, that this constituted the opening to the Jews of the first leaf of the gate of covenant grace, and that it commenced with the ministry of Christ, is evi- dent from the following : " Now when John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, THE TIME IS FULFILLED," ). c., the last of the " Sev- enty weeks" predicted by Daniel ix. 25, has begun to run its course : " the kingdom of God is at hand ; repent ye, therefore, and believe the Gos- pel." ' It was '■^finished" to them, when Christ was " cut off in the midst" of that week, by his crucifixion on the 'cross, tahen in connection with what transpired subsequently to his resurrection, down to the time when, for their persistency in rejecting the offers of mercy and salvation, Paul and Barnabas said, "/i was necessary that the word of God should first hav» been spoken to you ; but seeing ye put it from you, and judge your- selves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."* This last-named interval em- braced, first, the "forty days" ministry of Christ after his resurrection ; and it was brought to a close when, beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to his disciples, in all the Scriptures, the things concerning himself;' and speaking to them also, just before being taken up, of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.= But, the consummation of Christ's act in " con- firming this covenant with many," had to await the conferment upon the apostles of their second great commission, after Christ's resurrection from the dead ; by which the other leaf of the gate of Gospel grace was opened to the Gentile world of all nations. ' " Go ye, therefore, and teach all na- tions," ' etc. . . "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature"^ etc. And so " we find that what Christ did personally, for three years and a half before his death, he did by 1 Matt. X. 6. = Compare Acts xxiii. 6, with Mark xii. 87. "^Mark i. 14, 15. < Acts xiii. 46. » Luke xxiv. 27. » John i. 3. ' Matt, xxviii. 16-20. " Mark xvi. 14-20. 144 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICALLV FXAJIINKD. the apostles mediately, three and a half years after his death ; just as he did miracles personally before his death, and by the apostles after." It will be well'here, also, to premise by the way, that whereas the Gospel, before the resurrection, was national, as confined to the Jews ; after that event, it be- came Catholic or universal : so that, " in every nation, he that feareth God and worketh right- eousness, is accepted of him." Hence the as- tonishing results of the preaching of the apostles, which followed the descent upon them of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, when at one time three thousand, and at another five thousand Jews were made obedient to the faith. Nor less astonishing were the results of this same work among the Gentiles. The great truth of the Catholicity of the Gospel, as included in the pro- cess of " confirming the covenant with many for one week," is now fully. opened up to Peter in his remarkable vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing all manner of living creatures. And mark — the specific design of its revelation at this particular time was, to prepare the way far the preaching of the Gospel to, and for the con- version of, THE fiBST Gentile convert to Chris- TIANITT SINCE THE OPENING OF THE NeW DiS PBNSATioN ! It was accomplished in the person of the Gentile centurion, Cornelius. Peter and the Jewish believers were convinced, that hence- forth the " confirming of the covenant with many" respected alike the people of "every nation;" that God had also set Jesus as " a light of the Gentiles, and that he should be for salvation unto the ends of the earth." The which, " when the Gentiles heard, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lorf : and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region ;" insomuch that the apostle Paul, referring to this veiy period, says, " Their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the end of the world." The following table of the most authentic his- torical chronology of this period is appended, in evidence of its harmony with the 490 years of Daniel's " seventy weeks." NAMES. KEFEEENCES. DIVISION OF THE 70 -WEEKS. EZRA NEHEMIAH'S Commission., do. Return to Persia do. 2d Return to Je- rusalem SnOOESSION OF THE HiGH PeibsthOop. Joiada Johanan (Jonathan). Jaddua Onias I Simon the Just Eleazar Manasseli Onias II Simon 11 ( Onias III. | /Jason. >• ( Menelaus. ) Pkinoes of Judab. 1. Jadas Maccabeus. 2. Jonathan 8. Simon 4. John Hyroanus. . . KiNQS OF JCDAH. 1. Aristobulus I 2. Alex. JannssuB 8. Alexandra i. Anstpbulus II 5. Hyroanus II. 6. Antigonus II 7. HEROD THE GREAT . Chkist born Cbkist's Baptism do. Ministry Conversion of Cornelius. . . Total. 18 Ear. vii. 11. Prid. Con., vol. ii. 18, 15, & 190. 12 Neh. ii. 1-6 ; V. 6. do. 146-151. 21 do. xiii. 6, 7. do. 151. do. xiii. 7. Compare John ii. 20, with Neh. xiii. 7. Neh. xii. 10. j. nu., y do. 11. do, do. 11. do. Prid., vol. ii. 850-895. do. 895-411. do. 411- vol. iii. 118 Prid., vol. ii. 205-265. 265-290. 290-850. do. do. do. do. do. do. do. 118-154. 154^183. ( 188-215. J. 215-220. I 220-299. 252-835. 885-875. 875-395. 49 J vol. iv. 7- 13. do. 18- 48. do. 48- 62. do. 62- 99. do. 99-193. do. 193-204. ( do. 204, 859-862. I do. 863-870. . Conap. Luke ii. 1-7, 21, with iii. 21-28. _M mo. The Four Gospels. 5 Ir' mo, Acts X. 1-8 ; 24r43. S O ^484 490 OOB BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 145 Thus the full nnd complete ratification of " the covenant with many'' during the last "week" of the "seventy," or 490 years "from the going 'orth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem," by the conversion of Cornelius, a. p. 37,' being coincident with A. m. 4169, the last of the seventy weeks or 490 years. Take now, the following summaries of the his- toric and longer prophetic periods of the chronol- ogy of Scripture, showing the result of the whole : I. From the Creation to the commencement of the predicted "seven times" of Moses and Danlol 84S0 years. The "seven times," as) 1. To the Natliity, 653 1 „,„,, „ shove, or 2520 years. f 2. To the year a. d. 1868 f '°'" Total 6000 " II. From the Creation to the commencement of Daniel's "seventy weeks." 8679 years. The "seventy weeks," or 490 years 490 " Add the years a. d. from thence, minas 87 years .1822 " 6991 " Add nine years 9 6000 » III. The several periods of the general historic chronology : 1. From the Creation to the Deluge 1656 years. 2. From Noah to Abraham 427 " 3. From Abraham to the Exode. 480 " 4. Entrance into Canaan, and the time of the Jndges 587 " 5. The Regal B£re, from Saul to the Babylonish captivity". 480 " 6. The Bsibylonish captivity, 70 years, 1 thence to the commencement > . . . . 149 " of DaniePs "seventy weeks." 79 " ) 7. The "seventy weeks" 490 " 4169 " Add the years a. d. from the close of the "seventy weeks," 1881 " Total 6000 " SECTION III. Further Scriptural evidence, confirmatory of the preceding interpretation of the " seven times" of Mose9 and Daniel. — Scriptural signification of the term, " time, or times," etc. — Proof that Christ himself so understood and used the phrase, " times of the Gentiles." We have neither time nor space further to reply to the objections of those who still urge, that the subject of Bible Chronology, historic and prophetic, and especially the latter, is not within the reach of human attainment; in other words, » It may not be out of place here to remark, that the hia- toric incidents narrated in the Acts, are not given in regu- lar sequence of time, but one narrative is followed out to its close, and then another taken up, though it should re- quire going back, in the order of time. This is evidently the case with chap. xi. 19, -which returns to chap. viii. 1. Nor will it avail, to object to our adoption of a. d. 87 as the date of the conversion of Cornelius, that it does not agree with the marginal chronology of that event as given in the 19 that " the times and seasons" of Holy Writ, are still (like as when the visions of the prophetic seer of Babylon were first revealed to him) " closed up and sealed," ' not only, but that " the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations," ' is never to be removed. We would most aifectionately but earnestly entreat all such objectors to note, that the " shutting up and sealing of the words of the book" by Daniel, was limited. That though " the vision" was to be for " many days," yet that, at " the time of the end, many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." ' That, "at the end, the vision shall speak, and not lie ;" * and that, finally, with this accords, I. The general import of the phrase, " times of THE Gentiles," agreeably to the declaration of our Lord, Luke xxi. 24, "And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, untid' the times of the Gentiles be fulfilkdP To understand this Scriptural phrase, we have already shown that, in "searching what, or what manner of time the spirit of Christ which was in the old prophets did signify," when it portrayed the vicissitudes of the Church, and the destiny of the world, in connec- tion with " the sufiisrings of Christ and the glory that should follow;" we must go back to the visions of the Babylonish monarch, Nebuchad- nezzar, and those subsequently revealed to Daniel, as the great chronological prophet, while a cap- tive in Babylon. These visions, taken together, demonstrate that the above phrase comprehends THE WHOLE PERIOD, during which Jerusalem was to be subjected to the dominant powers of Gen- common N. T. version. We may not, from the narrative of the Acts, be able to fix mih precision, the date of that event, yet it is easy to show, that the common marginal chronology, which is wholly arbitrary and unsupported, must be too late, and that a. d. 87, agrees much better with the facts that are known. The stoning of Stephen preceded the conversion of Cornelius, having commenced a. d. 84, or early in 85, and closed in A. d. 89. (See Acts vii. ; ix. 31, and xi. 19.) Paul's conversion transpired in a. d. 85 (Acts ix.) Three years after, Paul made his first visit to Jerusa- lem, A. D. 88 (Gal. i. 18). Bat it was at thit visit, that tha Apostle received his commission to goto the Gentiles, and began to dispute with the Grecians (Acts ix. 29), at the time when the disciples at Antiooh did the same (Acts xi. 19-26. See also chap. xxii. 21). But this proves demon- strably, that the door had then heen opened to the Gentiles by the comeersion of Cornelius, ns otherwise these proceedings could not have been sanctioned by the Church at Jerusa- lem in sending forth Paul to Cesarea (the abode of Corne- lius), as may be inferred from Acts ix. 80 ; and also Bar- nabas to Antiooh (Acts xi. 22), at which place he. sought Paul's help as the chosen vessel of the Gentiles (verse 25). The fair inference, therefore, from the above is, that the conversion of Cornelius must have taken place before a. d. » Dan. viii. 26 ; xii. 4, 9. « Isa. xxv. 7. = Dan. xii. i. * Habak. ii. 8. 146 OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. tilism. This is evident, first, from the interpre- tation by Daniel of the vision of the colossal image as revealed to Nebuchadnezzar, showing that this domination of Gentilism over the Jewish com- monwealth was to extend from the period indi- cated by the "head of gold," through the inter- vening eras denoted by the other symbols of the image, down to the time when the Messianic " stone'' smites the image on the ten toes of the feet, and the setting up of that kingdom by the God of Heaven which shall stand forever.' But more especially, second, in the things " noted" by the monarch's second vision, that of the great tree, as expository of the first. This tree, it will be recollected, flourished, and was glorious in the eyes of men ; but it was a thing against which Heaven watched, until at length the command was given, " Hew the tree down, and destroy it ; yet leave the stump of the roots thereof in the earth, even with a hand of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field ; and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let his portion be with the beasts of the field, till seven times ^ass over him."^ Now, though this prophetic vision primarily referred to the personal history of Nebuchadnez- zar, and was verified in his being driven out from men, to herd with the beasts of the field in a state of maniacy for seven literal years, when he was again restored to his kingdom, etc.;* yet, from the fact that when the Messianic '* stone" comes and smites the colossal image on its feet, it is found still standing complete in all its parts,* it is demonstrative, that the Babylonish monarch, as the HEAD of that image, is the representative of the Gentile powers throughout. It hence fol- lows, that the mystical number of " seven times," which was to pass over him during his maniacal exile in the expository vision of the tree, must also regard him in his representative character, in his relation to these Gentile powers. Consistency therefore requires, that while his state of maniacy symbolizes the wild and ferocious nature of those powers (and which are exhibited in detail in Daniel's synchronic vision of the four rampant beasts, — ^the two-winged lion, the bear with three ribs in his mouth, the four-headed and four-winged leopard, and the nondescript monster with ten horns and another little horn,' together with the little horn which sprang from one of the four horns of the rough goat in his second vision) ; ° the " SEVEN times" which were to pass over them, must run commensurative with their whole exist- • See Dau. ohiip. ii. * lb. ii. 84, 85. ' lb. iv. 10-23. » lb. vii. 1-8. ' lb. ver. 28-87. » lb. viii. 8-12. ence. This corresponds exactly with Daniel's rep- resentation of the period assigned to the mad career of those powers. For, while of the four beasts he says, that they " devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with their feet ;" ' of the first " little horn" — the Soman — he adds, that he " made war with the saints, and prevailed against them, until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High ; and the tim£ came that the saints possessed the kingdom :" ' and, of the second " little horn" — the Mohammedan — he adds, that "his power shall be mighty . . . that he shall destroy won- derfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people -. . . for many days,"' i. e. for 2300 years.* Finally, as out of these powers is to arise another (the last great antichristian confederacy), and which shall be headed by a " king that shall do accord- ing to his will, and that shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and prosper till the indignation be accomplished," ' etc. ; the prophet tells us that this shall be "at the time when Michael, the great Prince," even Mes- siah, "who standeth for the children of his people" — the Jews — " shall stand up." Now this period, while it commences at the expiration of "the times of the Gentiles," introduces us to that unchronological season of unparalleled trouble, in the midst of which the Messianic " stone" comes in clouds to " deliver his people, every one that shall be found written in the book, and awake" his saints " that sleep in the dust of the earth," * etc. The incontrovertible inference is, that the pe- riod designated by our Lord as " tJie times of the Gentiles" is no other than that revealed by his " spirit" first to Moses,' and afterwards to Daniel,' under the mystical form of " seven times." This prophetic number I have elsewhere shown, when deciphered according to the rule laid down, viz., "a year for a day," embraces 2520 years.' It commenced with the captivity of Judah under Manasseh, a. m. 3480 (b. o. 652), is still running on, and will end when " the fulness of the Gen- tiles be come in," in a. d. 1868. I have only to add on this subject, a word or so regarding the significations attached to the terms time or times, when spoken of a kingdom. These can only be determined by a reference to the context, the same word being susceptible of 1 Dan. vii. 19. " lb. ver. 21, 22. a lb. viii. 2t-26. « lb. ver. 18, 14. » lb. xi. 81-89. « lb. xii. 1, 2. ' Lovit. xxvi. 18, 21, 24, 28. s Dan. iv. 23. = See pages 108, 109 of this work. OUR BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 147 directly opposite meanings; as in the phrase, " time of visitation," which signifies in one place, a visitation of wrath,' in another, a visitation of mercy.'' Again : While the " times" in Luke xxi. 24, necessarily refer to the ages of affliction and op- pression of the Jews, and by an obvious contrast as regards the Gentiles, whose times they are called, they are- the period of their domination ; so, reasoning by analogy, the fulfilment of the times of the Gentiles must be the time of deliver- ance to the Jews ; which is plainly implied by the expression, " Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."* We have an illustration of this in what the Lord says of the King of Babylon : " All nations shall serve him, and his son, and his son's son, rrsTTiL the very time of his land come : and then many nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him."'' The words, "time of his land come," are here equivalent to the fulfilment of his time, during which he was to have the empire over the nations ; and then the scene was to be reversed, and they were to " serve themselves of him." But, II. With the import of the phrase, " times of the Gentiles," thus determined, I shall now pro- ceed to show, that our blessed Lord himself used it in this sense, in the passage quoted from Luke xxi. 24, and which will introduce us to the sub- ject of the GREAT TRIBULATION wliich he predicted should precede his second coming. Yes, present to the mind of Christ when he uttered this proph- ecy, was the period of the mystical " seven times," or 2520 years' chastisement of the Jews for their sins at the hand of the Gentiles, of which Moses and Daniel spake in accordance with the inspi- ration of his " spirit which was in them." Hence when he declared, as stated by St. Luke, '' And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled ;" yea more : when he uttered those fearfully porten- tous words to the still obduiate Jews, Matt, xxiii. 38, " Behold, your house is left unto you desolate ;" it was the same as though he had said to them — "That tribulation which commenced (as pre- dicted by Moses and Daniel), with the captivity of Judah under Manasseh, a. m. 3480, inflicted upon you by your long-off'ended covenant God, on account of your sins, at the hand of the great Gentile desolatob, — Babylonian, Medo-Persian, > Jer. xi. 23. ' Compare Luke vii. 16, and xix. 44. = See Mark i. 15, and Luke i. 57. « Jer. xxvii. 7 ; see also Ezek. xxx. 3, 26, which compare with x.Yix. 12. Grecian, and, now, Roman — and which 685 years' endurance of it by you as a nation, has failed to humble and reform ; that tribulation, I repeat, is henceforth ' left' to you, to run on in continued and increasing severity at the hand of the same great Gentile desolator, whose ' overspreading of abominations shall make desolate' ' your once ' pleasant land,' ' together with your ' Holy city' and 'Temple,' 'not one stone of which shall be left that shall not be thrown down.' Yea, the great Desolator 'shall so plant the tabernacle of his palaces between the seas in the glorious holy mountain," that 'you shall fall' at his hand 'by the edge of the sword ;' you shall again ' be led by captivity into all nations ; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,' or 'until the con- summation^* which shall be to you, not only, but especially to the subjects of the Gentile desolator, a time of 'great tribulation" — of 'affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.' " As to the question, how far this prophecy may be considered as applicable to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, as indicated by the " signs" enumerated by the Evangelists, I would observe, that prophecy for the most part deals with crises. The events of the latter day are the great sub- jects of prophetic vision, and therefore they alone will be found to exhaust the fulness of the de- scription. Nevertheless, the providence of the Most High has arranged, that events similar in character, though less in importance, should pre- viously occur, either as warnings, exemplifications, and sometimes as types, of the consummation that is to follow ; so that the description of the great event, becomes, in part, applicable to the forerun- ner. It is upon this principle, that many of the pro'phecies of the Old Testament are applied to the New^ For example : the context of Jer. xxxi. 15, makes it evident that it applies to the great future tribulation of the Jews ; yet in the New Testament it is applied to a minor event, which has already occurred, similar in kind, though less in degree.' So the second Psalm, which prima- rily refers to the last great Antichristian apostasy, is quoted in a similar manner in Acts iv. 25-28. Compare also Zech. xii. 10, with John xix. 37; and Joel ii. 28, with Acts ii. 17. Evidently then, on this principle alone, can that part of Matt. xxiv. 5-16, which relates to the " signs" that were to 1 Dan. ix. 27. * lb. ix. 27. « See Matt. ii. 18. 2 lb. viii. 9. a lb. xi. 45. « Matt. x.\iv. 21 ; Murk xiii. 19. 148 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. indicate the approaching destruction of Jerusalem, be harmonized with verses 21-27, which refer to those that were to harbinger the coming of the Son of man, wheu " the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." Hence it is that prophecy, throwing its strong- est light upon the concluding events of the Gen- tile dispensation, and increasing in importance as time advances, is nevertheless rendered useful throughout the whole period, by admitting of being applied, though not exclusively interpreted, with relation to antecedent events, kindred in principle, if not closely parallel in fact, to that which is mainly the subject of prediction. This may be exemplified by a comparison of the great tribulation, as given by Matthew and Luke. St. Matthew's description of it, may be compared to an object-glass closed. St. Luke draws it out, joint by joint. He first enlarges our view of it, by stating, " These be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." He then explains one step further : " There shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people ;" then with more partic- ularity, he declares that there shall be a massacre, " They shall fall by the edge of the sword ;" and a leading into captivity, they "shall be led captive into all nations." At last, he draws out the glass to its full focus : " And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gen- tiles be fulfilled." Thus is the picture defined in its details, and we discern by this glass, the whole of the pro- phetic HISTORY OF THE " GREAT TRIBULATION ;" ■which, having attained its culminating point, forms the immediate antecedent " sign" to, and is to be admonitory of, the glorious advent " in the clouds of the Son of man." Another important point in this connection is, to ascertain the progressive stages of the " ^reat tribulation," in its developments during the pe- riod assigned to it in this prophecy. Our busi- ness here will be, to discriminate between the degrees of it, as characteristic of its commencement, in contradistinction to its crisis. Now, while some writers, in view of the sufier- ings and horrors experienced by the Jews at the siege of Jerusalem, especially in regard to the circumstance, that women were led by hunger to devour their own children, find in that event, all that is comprehended in the above " tribulation" as unprecedented in the history of the world ; yet a close examination of the details of the prophecy will prove it fallacious. As I have said, so I now proceed to show, that the unparalleled tribu- lation spoken of by Matthew and Mark, though similar in its character, was not only not confined to, but that it formed no part of it. Indeed, marked, and signal, and appalling as was the siege of Jerupaiein by Titus, yet it is not true, that it was without a parallel. A comparison of the besiegement of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, as predicted by Moses, Deut. xxviii. 47-68, with that by Titus, will make this clear. Jeremiah, in reiterating that prophecy in reference to the second Babylonish siege of the Holy city, says, " I will make this city desolate and a hissing; every one that passeth by shall be astonished and hiss, because of all the plagues thereof; and I will cause them to eat the Jlesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall every one eat the flesh of his friend in the siege and strait- ness, wherewith their enemies and they that seek their lives shall straiten them."' And having lived himself to witness the fulfilment of this prophecy, in his lamentations over the destruction of the city by Nebuchadnezzar, he records the historic fact in the following terms : " Behold, Lord, and consider to whom thou hast done this. Shall the women eat their fruit, and children of a span longP The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children ; they were their meat in the destruction of the daughters of thy people."' And Daniel, in alluding to the fulfil- ment of this curse as denounced by Moses as above, chap. ix. 11, in the next following verse adds concerning the Lord : " He hath confirmed his words which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil : for under the whole heaven hath NOT BEEN DONE Es hath becu done upon Jeru- salem." Evidently, therefore, we must look beyond the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, for the unprecedented character of that " tribulation" spoken of by the evangelists. On this subject, and as introductory to a proper understanding of it, I remark, that though Moses and Daniel, in the passages already quoted,'' refer primarily to the second Babylonish invasion of Jerusalem, yet the former predicts, Deut. xxviii. 63, 64, "And ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it; and the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from one end of the earth even to the other" etc.; and this, he declares, as also their "plagues and sore sicknesses," shall be of "long contin- uance" (verse 59), doubtless in allusion to the ' Jer. xix. 8, 9. * Deut. xxviii. 47-6 ' Lam. ii. 20. Dan. ix. 18. ' lb. iv. 10. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 119 previously predicted " seven times" chastisement with which they were threatened in Lev. xxvi. ; while the latter, Dan. ix. 26, 27, says of "the people of the prince that shall come to destroy the city and the sanctuary," that they " shall make it desolate, even vntil the 0onsummatiok," etc. : so that the unparalleled character of the tribula- tion which commenced with the captivity of Ma- nassehjking of Judah, a.m. 3480, and was prima- rily verified in the second Babylonish siege of Jerusalem, whilst it includes the dreadful suffer- ings endured in that siege and straitness, yet does more immediately refer to, and respect their being led away captive into all nations, and their be- coming a by-word and reproach, and suffering thus the wrath of God for so long a period ; — so long (2520 years), that the spirit saith of its con- clusion, ^^ Jerusalem hath received of the Lord's hand double yb/" all her sins."^ But, to place this important matter in a still clearer light, as affording additional evidence that the above prophecies looked beyond the tribula- tion at the siege of the Holy city under Titus, for a verification of its unparalleled character, I will place in juxtaposition the two following pas- sages from Jeremiah and Daniel, in relation to it : Danikl xn. 1, 2. "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great Prince which standeth for the children of thy people ; and there shall be a time of trouble, uvea as neveb was SINCK THERE WAS A NATION, EVEN TO THAT SAME TIME : and at that time thy people s/idU be delivered, eeery one that shall he found written m the book. And many of them that SLEEP IN THE DUST OF THE EAllTH SHALL AWAKE, SOme to everlasting life, and some to shame, and everlasting contempt. Jekemiah XXX. 6-9. " Aak ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? Wherefore do I see every man with his bands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into pale- ness ? Alas 1 for that day is great, so that none is like Tt: itia even the time of Ja- cob'' s trouble ; but he shall be saved out of it. For it shall come to pass iu that day, saith the Lord of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy nech, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of Mm : but they shall serve the Lord their God, and David their king, WHOM I WILL RAISE UP UNTO THEM." Now here, the " more sure word of prophecy, as a light which shineth in a dark place," in speaking of " the manner of time'' revealed to these Old Testament prophets by " the spirit of Christ which was in them," evidently refers to that which forms the crisis of the ffreat tribulation. It only remains now that I harmonize the proph- ecy of our Lord in Matthew and Luke, with that > Isa. xl. 2. of Jeremiah and Daniel. This " great tribulation," as I have said, viewed in its remotest bearings as to the order of time, commenced with the captiv- ity of Manasseh, a. m. 3480, and of which the siege of Jerusalem, by Titus, was a signal, though 7iot an unprecedented act of the Divine vengeance against the Jews. But there is a period assigned to it by Jeremiah, by Daniel, and by our Lord, when, compared with all others which have pre- ceded it, there shall be no parallbl. St. Luke infoims us, that that " great tribulation" is to continue " until the times of the Gentiles be FULFILLED." That is, it was to extend from the time that Jerusalem should be ^^ compassed with armies" (Luke xxi. 21), — by which "sign" the Jews should be forewarned that " the desolation thereof was nigh," — down to the period of the complete closing up of the chronologico-mystical number of the " seven times," or the 2520 years of Jewish national chastisement from a. m. 3480, called "the fulness of the Gentiles." Then, and not " until" then, was the Jewish tribulation to cease. Then, and not " until" then, was the " great tribu- lation," in its unprecedented or unparalleled character, to begin to develop itself. The periodi therefore, to which it belongs, is the interval be- tween A. d. 1868 (when '• the end of the world," Trig ovvTsXeiag t» aiuvog, or the Gentile dis- pensation or age, will be consummated), and the coming of the Son of man in clouds. But, unlike the predicted events which precede and run out at A. D. 1868, we have no chronological data by which to determine its length. This accounts for the fact, why it is declared of the time of the SECOND ADVENT OF Jesus Christ, " Of that day and that hour knoweth no man" etc. And yet, while Matthew and Mark fix the time for the commencement of this interval, Luke unites with them in limiting it within the period of the gener- ation existing when it commences. For instance : Matthew, Mark, and Luke, fill up this entire interval by a series of " signs" which are to trans- pire as descriptive of the unparalleled character of the "great tribulation" by which it is to be signalized ; e. g., the appearance of false Christs and false prophets, whose great signs and wonders shall, if possible, deceive the very elect ; a derangement and obscuration of the heavenly luminaries : ' to which St. Luke adds, distress of nations, with perplexity ; the roaring of the sea and waves, and a failing of men's hearts for fear," etc. ; so that, while St. Luke omits, in part, those ' Matt. xxiv. 22-26, 29 ; Mark xiii. 21-25. » Luke xxi. 25, 26. 150 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. "signs" enumerated by Matthew (verses 22-26); he joins those which he mentions (verses 25, 26), immediately to the closing up of " the times of the Gentiles" (verse 24) ; thus showing that the time which he appropriates for the appearance of the celestial phenomena, — the darkening of the sun, moon, and stars, — synchronize exactly with that mentioned for the appearance of the same " signs" by Matthew and Luke ; i. e., at the close of "the times of the Gentiles" in a. d. 1868. It follows incontrovertibly, that the "signs" mentioned, first, by St. Luke, of the persecutions of the disciples of Christ (chap. xxi. 12-19);' second, by St. Matthew, of wars, rumors of wars, and national conflicts, etc. (chap. xxiv. B-1 and 14) ; '' and third, of the destruction of the Jews by the edge of the sword, and their being led captive into all nations (chap. xxi. 24), were, one and all, to precede, and are to be distinguished from, the exhibition of the celestial phenomena mentioned by-each. The first in order were to precede the " compassing of Jerusalem with ar- mies ;" ' the second were to accompany and accom- plish the work of the siege ;^ the third were to follow, as the result of that siege, down to the period of the "consummation"^ of the Gentile age. With the subject before us, thus divested of the obscurity which has so long overshadowed it, we reach the inevitable conclusion, that whatever of resemblance may be traced between them, the UNPARALLELED character of the "tribulation" spoken of by Matthew xxiv. 21, and by Mark xiii. 19, "Suck as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this Mark xiii. 24. • Matt. xxiv. 34; Mark .xiii. 80: Luke xxi. 82 to be limited to, the last generation of the present age. Thus then is harmonized the respective decla- rations of Jeremiah, Daniel, and our blessed Lord, regarding the time and the characteristics of the unparalleled 'I'ribulation, It is emphatically styled by Jeremiah as " the great day, even the TIME OF Jacob's trouble." By Daniel, as "a iim^ of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that same time.'" And by St. Luke, "The days of vengeance, that all things which are written, might be fulfilled." But it may be asked, how, if this season of un- paralleled tribulation is to constitute "the time of Jacob's trouble," is this statement to be reconciled with the ending of it as has been represented, with the close of the Gentile age in a. d. 1868 ? To this I reply, that though St. Luke's statement is, that the Jewish tribulation is to close, when the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, yet we are not to understand that they are ended, in the absolute sense. Like " the rest of the beasts" in Daniel, chap. vii. 12, who "had their dominion taken away," while " their lives were prolonged for a season and time ;" so, while the prolonged captiv- ity of the Jewish nation, which is the subject exclusively spoken of by St. Luke, will end at the time assigned to it, yet it by no means necessarily follows, that their sufferings will then altogether terminate. This will appear from the peculiar phraseology in St. Mark's Gospel : "But in those days, after that tribulation," etc., thus intimating, that the days of the tribulation, though drawn to a close, are not absolutely passed away : not that this is a distinct tribulation in contrast with, or in addition to, that which preceded it, but only the climax of it : it is, so to speak, the last act, yea, the last scene of the drama, in which occurs the grand catastrophe of the whole. Nor, further; are we to lose sight of the im- portant fact, that this " great tribulation" in its last form of development, is to " come as a snare on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth." That is, " the days of vengeance" having reached their crisis, coincident with the period when God has his controversy with the Gentile nations, all the inhabitants of the world will be exposed to its fury, in accordance with the proph- ecy following, Isa. xxiv. 5, 6 : " The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant : there- fore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate; therefore the inhab- itants of the earth are burned, and few men left." OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 151 But, in the midst of the general consternation and dismay that shall then seize upon all classes, — ''men's hearts failing them for fear," etc. — the jealousies of the crowned heads of Gentilism against the returned tribes of Judah, now dwell- ing nationally but in an unconverted state in the Holy City, shall incite them to arms, when again, but for tlie last time, an unprecedented storm of persecution, like the devastations of a resistless tornado, shall be brought down upon the heads of Daniel's people. The prophet Zechariah, al- luding to this very persecution, says, "Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be in the midst of thee. For I will bring all nations against Jerusalem to battle ; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished ; and half the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city," etc. This, then, is " the time of Jacob's trouble, so that there is none like it" spoken of by Jeremiah, Daniel, and our Lord. " But, he shall be saved OUT OF IT." For, says Zechariah, " TTien shall the Lord go forth and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem," ' etc. This period of the deliverance of Daniel's people, Isaiah makes exactly coincident with the existence of the celestial and terrestrial phenomena of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In chap. xxiv. 21-23, having said, " And it shall come to pass in that dag, that the Lord shall punish the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth," . . . he adds, "Then the moon shall be con- founded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusa- lem, and before his ancients gloriously.'' Finally, in regard to this last closing scene of the above unparalleled tribulation, and its results to the Jews and their Gentile oppressors, the prophet Jeremiah presents us with the following succinct and beautifully graphic picture : "Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away : first, the king of Assyria hath devolired him ; and last, this Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, hath broken his bones. There- fore, thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Is- rael : Behold, I will punish the king of Babylon and his land, as I have punished the king of As- syria ; and I will bring Israel again to his habi- tation, and he shall feed on Carmel and Bashan, and his soul shall be satisfied on Mount Ephraim ■ Zech. ziv. 8, 4. and Gilead. In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquity of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none ; and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found ; for I will pardon them whom I reserve." ' SECTION IV. The subject of the Prophetical numbers contin- ued — The shorter periods. I. The " two thousand three hundred days," Dan. viii. 14 (2300 years). II. The "five months," Eev. ix. 6, 10 (150 years). III. The number, " an hour, a day, a month, and a year," Rev. ix. 14, 15 (396 years). IV. The "time, times, and dividing of time," Dan. vii. 25, and xii. 7, together with the syn- chronic numbers following : the " thousand two hundred and three-score days," Rev. xi. 2, 3 ; the " twelve hundred and sixty days," Rev. xi. 3-6 ; and " the time, times, and half a time,'' Rev. xii. 14 (each 1260 years). V. The "thousand two hundred and ninety days," Dau. xii. 10 (1290 years). VI. " The thousand three hundred and five and thirty days," Dan. xii. 11 (1335 years). VII. The number "six hundred and sixty-six," Rev. xiii. 18 (666 years). Having now disposed of the two great collateral numbers denoted by the " seven times" of Moses and of Daniel, and shown that they signify the period of 2520 years, commencing a. m. 3480, B.C. 652, and ending with the period called "the times of the Gentiles" in the 6000th year of the creation, we pass to consider the shorter prophetic dates above enumerated. The same system of interpretation, i. e., the year-dag theorg already explained in this work,' will be applied to them as to the preceding. It is important to bear in mind respecting these prophetic dates, taken as a whole, that, while some of them may have been entirely, and others partially fulfilled ; so, from the fact that the shorter dates either form integral parts of, or are inter- linked with, the longer periods which overleap them (and this is especially true of all of them in their relation to the " seven times"), they are classified with the unfulfilled prophecies of Scrip- ture, With these remarks premised, we shall ' Jer. 1. 17-20. » Seo pages 108-111. 152 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. now proceed in our endeavor to verify these dates agreeably to the order above indicated ; and, I. The " TWO THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED DAYS (2300 years), Dan. viii. 14, together with the in- tegral numbers, the "Jive months" of Rev. ix. 10, and the numbers, "an hour, a day, a month, and a year" of Rev. ix. 15. Several important questions have arisen in regard to this 2300 days, about which there has been much controversy. It may be premised, that the passage in Dan. viii. 14, " unto two thousand and three hundred days," is written in the original, as in the margin, "unto 2300 evenings mornings-" and hence, in verse 26, it is called "the vision of the evening and the morning which was told." " Told," for the reason that the time in this vision, unlike that of chap. vii. 25, and xii. 11, 12, where the iim^ is not mentioned in the vision itself, either by sym- bol or otherwise; (see verses 15-22). I repeat, " told," that the time in this vision, being imme- diately annexed to it, forms a part of it, and the explanation follows after. Thus, in the Apoca- lypse, the periods of time, though occurring in visions,' are declared. The apostle "hears" the number of the sealed ones,' of the horsemen, etc. ; ' and in other instances, how long the objects seen are to continue, is expressed by its being said, that power was given to them for this end, or by some similar mode.' So in the instance under con- sideration. After the action of the vision has been exhibited to the prophet, one saint speaks to another saint for the purpose of eliciting the tim^ of the vision ; and he hears the reply — " unto 2300 days." But it is objected to this prophetic number, 1. That the Vatican copy of the Septuagint reads " 2400 days," and copies translated by Je- rome " 2200 days ;" and that, in support of the former number, the celebrated missionary, Joseph Wolff, states, that the Jews of Ispahan and Bok- hara, possess some ancient manuscripts of the prophetic writings of Daniel, in which chap. viii. 14, reads " 2400, instead of 2300 days :" also, that when in Adrianople in 1826, he saw an Ar- menian manuscript of the Bible in Greek, sup- posed to be of the fifth century, and translated by Mesrop, in which the same number occurs ; and yet this missionary tells us, that "as the most number of the manuscripts contain 2300," he adopted that number in his arguments with the Mullah at Lucknow. And, indeed, the authori- ' Eev. vii. i. » lb. ix. 16, 17. 3 lb. xi. 2, S ■ xii. 6 ; xiii. 15, etc. ties in favor of this latter number of 2300 days, are so numerous compared with the others, " that there is probably no numeral in the Scriptures the correctness of which may be more entirely relied on ;" ' and, as to the Vatican copy, it is aflSrmed by competent judges, " that there is not a single manuscript known to be extant, whether Hebrew or Greek, that sanctions the reading of 2400 days. It rests entirely upon a manifest typographical error of the Vatican edition, taken from the Vatican manuscript; which the Chis- ian edition of Daniel notices, and says, that the Vatican manuscript reads 2300."' 2. Another objection is urged against the ap- plication of the year-day theory to the date in this prophecy. Among the principal writers of this class, are Mr. Maitland, and the late Professor Moses Stuart, of Andover. Understandingthe 2300 days to mean literal days, the whole prophecy is claimed to have been verified in the history of Antiochus Epiphanes, as the great Jewish Anti- christ. But, in addition to what we have already offered in refutation of this theory,' it may be observed, that the most cursory examination will convince us that days will not answer to any of the circumstances of the vision ; for it clearly begins with Alexander (v. 21), and runs beyond "the latter time" (v. 23), of the four successors of Alexander; whereas 2300 days are little more than six years. Our Lord also refers to this vi- sion when speaking of the abomination of desola- tion preceding Jerusalem's destruction (Matt. xxiv. 15), which, taken in any possible sense, compels us to understand years : for 2300 days cannot by any ingenuity be extended down to the time of our Lord ; and if, on the other hand, the time is connected with the last Antichrist, 2300 days cannot be extended back to the time of Jerusa- lem's destruction. Again, it is to be borne in mind that the vision is for " many dcCys" (v. 25), and in the midst of the events of the vision (v. 13) stands "the transgression of desolation," to which our Lord refers in Matt. xxiv. 15, Mark xiii. 4, and which we know from Luke xxi. 20, was to undergo a fresh outbreak, " when Jerusalem was compassed with armies and the desolation thereof nigh." The number 2300 therefore, of very necessity, joins on to or includes this event, because it is asked, " How long shall be the vision, to give both the sanctuary and host to be trodden, under foot P' It must also, of very necessity, reach down to the cleansing of the sanctuary, — " Then ' See Investigator of Proph., vol. iv. p, 815. " lb. vol. i. p. 441. » See pp. 109-111 of this work. OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 153 shall the sanctuary be cleansed" (v. 14) ; an event which, by the confession of all, is still fu- ture, and therefore cannot be included in 2300 literal days.' We shall now proceed to furnish the reader with what we conceive to be the Scriptural basis for the interpretatiou of this remarkable prophecy. In order to do this, it will be necessary in the outset to show wherein it differs fiom 'the things signi- fied in the synchronic visions of the "seven times" of Moses and of Daniel. It may be distinguished thus : The " seven times" of Moses, Lev. xxvi., relates to the prolonged captivities of the Jewish nation while under the dominance of the four ruling Gentile monarchies ; and the " seven times" of Daniel, chap, iv., refer to the same event under the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and Grecian dy- nasties, together with the "wearing out of the saints" by pagan and papal Eome in the Western empire : while the 2300 days above, bring to view a more specific revelation of the vicissitudes of the Church and people of God, not only Jewish, but especially Gentile, at the hands of the Sara- cenic and Turkish or Mohammedan power, as the scourge of the great Eastern apostasy ; and of which the symbolic imagery of the Euphrates in the ninth and sixteenth chapters of the Apocalypse, form integral parts. The distinction here instituted, between the papal Boman and the Mohammedan powers, as chastising rods in God's hand for the punishment of the apostate Western and Eastern Churches, is founded on the characteristic differences of the two little horns spoken of in Dan. vii. 8, 20, 21, and verses 24, 25; and chap. viii. 8-12, and verses 23-25. It hence interprets the mystical Euphrates of the sixth trumpet and sixth vial, as above (Rev. ix. 13-21, and xvi. 12), to signify the Moham- medan, and NOT the Roman papal horn. 3. To this, however, it is objected, that these two little horns are identical; i. e., that both relate to the career of the little papal horn of Dan. vii.; and hence, that the Euphrates of the Apocalypse, chapters ix. and xvi., refers exclu- sively to that power. 4. The importance of a settlement of the points at issue, will appear obvious to the reader, from their connection with the subject in hand when viewed in a chronological aspect. Upon it depends the adjustment of the true periods for the com- mencement and close of the 2300 days, not only ; but also of the 1260 days of Dan. vii. 25, and of the 1290 and 1335 days of chap. xii. 11, 12. On ' Morning Watch, number 10, p. 517. 20 the hypothesis of the objectors, that the two little horns are identical, it will follow, that both relate to the papal Antichrist, and that the plat- form on which they appear, is the Western Ro- man Empire. On the other hand, if they are two separate and distinct powers, then, however they may bear several strong marks of resem- blance in their general character and operations, and though the one, for a time, may run parallel with the other, it will follow, that they must differ as to the circumstances of their origin, their geo- graphical location, the objects of their wrath, and their final overthrow ; in other words, that while the " little horn" of Dan. vii. 8, etc., denotes the Roman or papal Antichrist, that of chap. viii. 8-12, etc., represents the great Mohammedan An- tichristian scourge. Our first business therefore is, to examine the question of the alleged identity of the two little horns. That they are not, and cannot be, identical, I submit, will appear from the facts following : I. They were revealed to Daniel in two separate visions, and at different times. The first occurred iu the first year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon,' and the second in the third year of the same king.' The first related to the vision of the four beasts which arose out of " the great sea," ' but espe- cially to the last or nondescript beast having ten horns, as among them arose another " little horn" * The second, to the vision of the ram with two horns, denotive of the Medo-Persian empire,' and its overthrow by the he-goat with one horn, rep- resenting Grecia ;" and the appearance, out of one of the four horns into which the "notable horn" of the he-goat was finally broken, of "a little horn" ' Now, evidently, the design of this second vision was, to make known to the anxious prophet sev- eral particulars in reference to the Medo-Persian and Grecian empires, additional to those revealed of them in the first. But both had special refer- ence to a delineation of the character and career respectively of the two little horns; although, then, as we have said, they may possess several strong marks of resemblance in their general character and operations, yet, that they form two entirely separate and distinct powers, may be seen, II. From a comparison of the two, as described by Daniel : iDan. vii. 1. "lb. viii. 1. » lb. vii. 1-8. ■> lb. verses 8, 20, 21, and 24, 25. 6 lb. viii. 1-7, and v. 20. « lb. viii. 4-7 ' lb. viii. 9. 154 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. THE LITTLE HOnN OF DAN- rEL VII. " I considered the horns (i. 0., the ten boms of the fourth or nondescript beast), and behold, there came v/p among them another little HORN, hefore whom there were three of the first horns plucked np ly the roots; and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things (v. 8). " Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, etc. , and of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell ; even of that horn which had eyes, and a month that spake very great tilings, whose look was Tnore stout than his fellows. I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them, until the Ancient of days came," etc. (ver. 19-22). " And he" (i. e., the little horn) shall speak great words against the Most High, and shaU wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws; and they (i. e., the saints) shall be given into his hands until A TmE, AND TIUES, AND THE DiviDiNO OF TIME. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and, to d-esbroy it unto the end" (ver. 25, 26.) THE LITTLE HORN Or DAN- IEL vni. " The he-goat (i. e., Alex- ander, the first " king of Greoia," v. 21) waxed very great : and when he was strong, the great horn was broken ; and for it came up four notable ones, toward the four winds of heaven ; and out of one of them came forth A LITTLE HORN, which, woxed exceeding great, to^oard the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven, atid it cast down some of the host, and of the stars, to the ground, and stamped upon them; yea, he miagnijted himself even to the prince of the host, and iy him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down, and the host was given over for the transgression of the daily sacrifice (marginal reading), and it (i. e., this little horn), cast down the truth to the ground, and it practised, and prospered" (ver. 8-12). "Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily saerifloe and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, unto two thousand AND THREE HUNDRED DAYS:" . . . "The vision shall be for MANY days" (ver. 26). . . . then shall the sanoUia- ry ie cleansed" (i.e., justified, marg.), ver. 18, 14. Now, that being broken (i. e., the great horn or first Grecian king, Alexander), whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his (Alexander's) power. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the trans- gressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sen- tences (i. e., the little horn of ver. 9-12), shdll stand up, and his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall destroy wonder- fully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty ami the holy people ; and through his policy also, he shall cause eraft to pros- per in his hand ; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and \iy peace (or pros- perity, marg.) shall destroy many : he shall also stand vp against the Prince of princes ; hut he shall he broken without hand" (ver. 22-26). With these two passages kept in view, it will be well to premise, that there are in prophecy two distinct symbols for Rome in its pagan, and Rome in its primary papal state : the one is the " iron legs" of the colossal image, and the syn- chronic fourth beast, or Rome pagan; and the other is the " ten toes" — iron mixed with clay — and the synchronic " ten horns" of the fourth beast, or Rome papal. With the first class of sym- bols correspond also the Apocalyptic seven-headed dragon, or pagan Rome ; and with the second, the seven-headed, ten-horned beast, or papal Rome.' To those writers, therefore, who make the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii. identical, we reply, first, that it cannot apply to Antiochus Epipbanes, for the reason, that, like all the other horns mentioned by Daniel, it must be the sym- bol of a continuous sovereignty — a realm, govern- ed, extended, protected, and preserved by him and his successors ; whereas the kingdom of An- tiochus Epipbanes did not prosper " toward the south and toward the east, and toward the pleas- ant land ;" ' nor did he succeed in subduing the Jewish nation (which, under the Maccabean dy- nasty, was wrested from his grasp) to his despotic sway. Besides, Antiochus Epipbanes was only a single individual, who appeared upon the stage and passed away, about 165 years after the com- mencement of the 2300 years which describe the gigantic power denoted by the little horn. And so, second, in regard to Rome papal. Resuming the thread of our arguments against the alleged identity of the two little horns, we observe, that as neither of them symbolize the Jewish perse- cutor Antiochus Epipbanes, and that the little horn of Dan. vii. denotes a separate and distinct form of Rome papal from that indicated by the "ten toes" and "ten horns;'' so, that the little horn of Dan. viii. refers to a power totally sepa- rate and distinct from either, will appear, III. From their origin. We have already ex- plained to the reader, that the fourth or nonde- script beast of Dan. vii. 1 denoted the Soman power, while the " ten horns of that beast rep- resented the empire in its division into ten sepa- ' Rev. xii. 3. ' Dan. viii. 9. OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 155 rate and independent dynasties.' Now, the eiglitli verse of that chapter explicitly declares, that there was a " little horn'' which '■'■came up among them ;" that is, it sprang from the head of the Roman beast, amid the ten horns, or kingdoms, which had an existence frlov to it, and " which exist at the present moment, with the slightest shades of difference, in the modern European nations." The origin of the tittle horn of Dan. vii. 8, therefore, was clearly Roman. But while, like the "ten horns," it was plainly a political dynasty, several additional characteristics are ascribed to it, clearly indicative of its investment with attributes which do not belong to the other. It had " eyes like the eyes of a man," by which is signified " one that oversees," from imaKonog, — whence is derived the English word Episcopacy — and, including, as does that term, the idea of priestly functions, it represents this " little horn" as endowed with an ecclesiastical power, that of "seeing, or superin- tending those that were beneath it." It had also "a mouth that spake very great things" aye, that " he shall speak very great words against the most High."" As with his "eyes" the Roman pontiff "professes to see into the realms of spirits; to read and to make known God's hidden, unsearch- able, and inscrutable record ; and pronounces, by declaring that he sees, what is the doom of the lost that are in woe, and the destiny of the saved that are in glory ;" so, says Dr. Cuming, who quotes direct from the annals of Baronius, Bel- farmine, and other writers of the Romish Church, the following epithets are bestowed upon her pon- tifical heads : " the Sovereign of the Church ;" the " Head of the Church ;" " our Lord ;" the "High priest and pastor;" the "chief doctor;" the "master;" the "father;" the "judge of all.'" And so, Bellarmine, the great cardinal and up- holder of the Church of Rome, on the subject of the pope's infallibility : " Si autem papa erraret praecipiendo vitia vel prohibendo virtutes, tene- retur ecclesia credere vitia esse bona et virtutes malas, nisi vellet contra conscientiam peccare."^ That is : " if the pope should err by commanding vices or prohibiting virtues, the Church would be bound to believe that vices were good and virtues bad, unless she wished to sin against conscience." Accordingly, " sanctissimus Dominus noster," " our most holy Lord," is the appellation given to the pope by the council of Trent.' "All power is • See pp. 119, and 124 of this work. ' Dan. vii. 20, 25. s Baron. Annals, 84. * Bel. de Kom. Pont, vol. i. p. 546, Prag. 1721. » Decretum super petitioue oonoessionis oalicis. Cone. Trid. sess. 22, cap. 2, p. 223, Paris, 1837. given to thee in heaven and earth," are words addressed to Gregory VII.' " It is idolatry to disobey the pope's commands."' It is also said of this little horn, that he had " a look more stout than his fellows" — i. e., the " ten horns" among whom he sprang up ; and that, on account of the preceding characteristics, not only, but also from what follows : " before" this little horn, " three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots." These were, as history abundantly verifies, the three kingdoms of the Vandals, Ostrogoths, and Lombards, who were, after a succession of troubles, rooted up by the papacy, and constituted into the States of the Church, in commemoration of which the popes of Rome to this day wear a triple crown.' He was also to " think to change times and laws," * etc. Jesus Christ says, "Drink ye all of this cup ;" the pope says, " the laity shall not drink of it." God says, " Thou shalt not make to thy- self any graven image, or the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth ; thou shalt not bow down to them nor worship them :" ° but " the pope permits images to be reared, crosses to be adored, and the bread upon the altar to be wor- shipped :" and hence, " in most of the Roman Catholic catechisms, that commandment is either left out altogether," or " bow" is changed into " adore," though the meaning of the original is strictly "bow," because the attitude of the body was forbidden, lest there should be the feelings of the soul immediately following or accompany- ing it. Again : God says, " Honor thy father and thy mother;" the pope substantially says, " If the father be a heretic, the son is bound to reveal him." God says, " Thou shalt not steal ;" the Romish doctors say, that " small thefts are only venial sins." God says, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy ;" the Romish cate- chism, as printed and published at Rome, says, " Recordati di sanctificare le festi :" " Remember the festivals to keep them holy." Finally, of this little horn it is said, that he " made war with the saints, and prevailed against them," and that they were to be ^^ given into his hand until a time, times, and the dividing of time ;" and that this period of persecuting of the saints, was to con- tinue " until the Ancient of days came, arid judg- ment was given to the saints of the Most High / and the time came that the saints should possess > Binius, vol. vii. p. 484. 2 Greg, vii., Dooret. chap. 4. 3 See chart of the Course of Empire, in this work, and symb. illus. p. 124. ■> Dan. vii. 25. s Exod. XX. 4, 5. 156 OUR BIBLE CHEdNOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. the kinffdom."^ It would require too much space to recount the circumstances of time, place, and occasion, on which millions of those who have protested against the corruptions of the papacy, have sealed their testimony with the blood of martyrdom, at the hand of this "little horn." We must also reserve for a future page, what we have to offer on the subject of the period of his dominancy over them, and proceed to observe, that, while the above characteristics of this " little horn" abundantly demonstrate its identity with Home on the one hand, and its distinction from the " ten horns" from amid which it sprang on the other ; it denotes the Roman papal, or Eccle- SIASTICO-POLITICAL POWER OF WESTERN RoME. But, as we have said, on the subject of the " little horn" of Dan. viii. 8-12, and verses 23-25, prophetical interpreters are divided, some advo- cating its identity with that of Dan. vii. 8, as Sir Isaac and Bishop Newton, Mr. Cuninghame, Dr. Jarvis, Mr. D. N. Lord, Rev. Edw. Winthrop, etc. ; while others, as Keith, and Kett, and Faber, and Dr. Scott, and Frere, and Bickersteth, and Brooks, with many more, construe it to denote the rise and career of the Mohammedan power or East- ern Antichrist. Nor can this subject be un- derstood, nor the chronology of the 2300, and the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days of Dan. vii. viii. and xii. be properly adjusted, till this important matter is satisfactorily settled. Nor will it avail to say that, because the learned disagree in this, therefore the true import of the two little horns lay beyond our reach. Such a canon, if applied in other directions, would prove equally subver- sive of the fundamental doctrines of Holy Writ, philosophy, the sciences, and the like, regarding which the learned have differed as widely as in the interpretations of prophecy. The subject in hand is clearly a matter of historic verity ; and, when rightly applied in verification of the things signified by the symbolic imagery, will furnish a demonstration that, while the " little horn" of the first vision in Dan. vii. denotes the great Roman Apostasy, the marks of correspondence between it and the " little horn" of the second vision in Dan. viii. to the contrary notwithstanding, the latter will be found to portray the rise, career, and final overthrow, of the great Mohammedan IMPOSTURE. In support of this view, we submit the following : It is evident that the symbolical drapery of the SECOND VISION, that of the Ram and the He- goat, relate exclusively to the history of Medo- ■ Dan. 21 1 25, and ver. Persia and Greece, the second and third of Dan- iel's four monarchies ; and that the " little horn" mentioned therein rises out of one of the "four notable horns" into which the "great horn" of the Grecian " He-goat" is divided ; in other words, out of one of the four divisions oi Alexander'' s Umpire. How then, we ask, can it be included in, and identified with, the " little horn" of Dan- iel's fourth or Roman monarchy of the first vis- ion ? Dr. Jarvis, in his "Two Discourses ou Prophecy," has laid down the two following judicious canons for the interpretation of this second vision. The fiist is^that we must "strict- ly confine ourselves within its limits, as to time, or territory, or events."' The second is, that "if we would avoid confusion, we must keep con- stantly in mind" the fact, that, from this vision, " the fourth beast, or the Roman Empire, consid- ered as one of the four beasts, is carefully ex- cluded^'' And yet, this learned divine insists, that the two " little horns" are nevertheless iden- tical ! Or, if not identical, yet that, from the moment in which the Romans conquered Mace- donia, it became essentially Roman ; it (i. e., the " little horn" of the second vision) rising out of that kingdom (Macedonia) as one of the "four notable horns" then in the hands of Cassander ; and from which time this horn of the goat began " to wax exceeding great," not by his own power, "but by the power of the Romans."^ To the same efl'ect speaks Mr. D. N. Lord, on the subject of the 2300 days. He says : "The vision is sym- bolic ; and as the ram, the goat, and their horns, signify the Persian and Greek powers and their monarchs," so, "of the little horn that sprang out of one of the four horns of the goat," he afiirms, that "this little horn is the Roman power which, after establishing itself in Macedonia, extended its conquests over the whole of what had been the Eastern and Southern Grecian Empire." " But there are several difiioulties to encounter, in admitting the above construction of this " little horn." Dr. Jarvis, as above, tells us, that "it obtained by gift, etc., the whole of the other three horns."* Now, from this, one would suppose that he meant it to be understood as identical with the " little born" of the first vision ; it being said of that horn, that "before it three other horns felW ' On this, however, we have to re mark, 1. That that "little horn" obtained possession of the other three, not by " gift," but by conquest. 1 Two Disc, on Proph., p. 47. " lb. p. 44, 45. ' See Coming and Keign of Christ, chap, xxxii. p. 890. * Two DiBO. on Proph., p. 45. » Dan. vii. 20. OUR BI«LE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 157 Daniel tells lis tliat by it " were three plucked up by the »'oo lb. 10, 11. * Rev. viii. 10, 11. » lb. ix. 1, 2. « Dan. viii. 12. ' Dan. viii. 24. a lb. v. 25. ' Compare with tliis, that of the little Roman horu, pp. 155, 156. OUR BIBLE CHKONOLO&Y CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 159 " And the sixth angd poured ont his vial upon THE GREAT RIVER EUPHRATES, and the water thereof wax dried «y», that the way of the kings of the East mjglit be prepared," etc. power in any part of the vision of Dan. viii. In addition to what has been already offered in proof of this f;iot, under our firet and third arguments,' there is a need-be to meet an objection to our in- terpretation of the mystical Euphrates, mentioned Rev. ix. 13-21, and xvi. 12, as signifying the MoJiammedan, and not the Roman " little horn." We will first place the two passages side by side. The former passage occurs under the sixth trum- pet ; the latter under the sixth vial. •' And {he sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of tlie golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel which had the trum- pet, Loose the four angels which are bound in the great river Euphrates. And the four angels were loosed," etc. We are mostly concerned, at present, with the latter text. AH writers are agreed, that by " the great river Euphrates," the prophet alludes to the river of that name that flowed through the an- cient city of Babylon, and that th« drying up of that river by Cyrus, by which means he captured that city, is employed by the Revelator to denote, symbolically, the overthrow of some great anti- christian power. But the question is, what is the antichristian power here alluded to? We say, it is the Mohammedan power. Other writers of note, who make the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii. identical, insist that it is the Roman papal power. Our limits will only allow of the following quotations, as indicating the theory of the writers of this class generally. It is taken from Mr. D. N. Lord's last-published work — "The Coming and Reign of Christ." That learned and distinguished writer says, " The Euphrates of that vial [i. e., the sixth] bears the same relation to the Babylon of the prophecy, that the real river bore to the literal Babylon, the metropolis of Chaldea, that stood on its banks. The symbol is taken from the drying up of the Euphrates by Cyrus, by diverting its waters from their channel, and by that means entering and conquering the city ; and it foreshows an analogous change in that which the symbolic Euphrates represents, and as the means of a similar conquest and destruction of that which the Babylon of the prophecy de- notes. But," he adds, "the waters of the Eu- phrates symbolize peoples, and nations, and mul- titudes," and in illustration, quotes Rev. xvi. 4, 5, and the interpretation of it as given by the an- > See pp. 158, 154 of this work. gel in chap. xvii. 15. On these premises he reaches the following conclusion: "That accord- ingly which the Babylon of the prophecy repre- sents, stands in a relation to those nations and multitudes, that resembles that of the literal Babylon to the Euphrates ; and is the hierarchy of the Catholic Church especially ^^ etc. ; while " the drying up of the waters of the Euphrates, symbolizes the separation, in a resembling man- ner, of the nations and multitudes of the king- doms of Europe from the hierarchies of the na- tionalized churches, especially the Catholic" ' etc. In reply to these statements — which are pre- sented with all the force characteristic of that generally accurate and reliable writer — I respect- fully submit, that there is an error in the appli- cation of the principle of interpretation appro- priate to the subject in hand. The principle here alluded to is, that we are required to main- tain an absolute connection between the symbolical Babylon and the symbolical Euphrates, answer- able to that which existed between them natural ly ; for example : As the Babylon of the Apoca- lypse is papal Rome, so the symbolical Euphrates must be something standing in the same relation to the symbolical Babylon, as the literal Eu- phrates to the ancient and literal Babylon ; and as the Euphrates was a figurative expression for the Babylonish population, so the Euphrates of the Apocalypse means the "peoples, and multi- tudes, and nations (Rev. xvii. 16) of the mystical Babylon." Additional evidence in support of this hypothesis, is also claimed to be derived from Isaiah viii. V : "Behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them (the people of Judah) the waters ot the river, strong and mighty, even the king of As- syria, and all his glory: and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks," etc. ; and also from Jer. xlvii. 2, where the armies of Assyria are described under the same figure of " an overflowing flood, which shall overflow the land and all that is therein ;" in which passages, it is alleged, special allusion is made to "the great river Euphrates :" and therefore, as the Babylon of the Apocalypse represents papal Rome, or some " mystery of iniquity" within the limits of professing Christendom, it is obvious that consistency requires our considering the symbolical Euphrates to be something standing in the same relation to the symbolical Babylon, as the literal Euphrates to the territorial of the ancient one ; and thus, the conclusion would ap- pear to be inevitable, that the Euphrates of the 1 Coming and Eeign of Christ,- chap. xxvi. pp. 829, 830. 160 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Apocal3'pse is an expression for the community by which the mystical Babylon supports her power, etc. Another writer on this subject, the Rev. Edward Winthrop, A. M., says : " That great city [i. e., Babylon] was the symbol, in the visions of the Apocalypse, of apostate and persecuting hierarchies within the ten kingdoms. But," he adds, "the waters [i. e., of the Euphrates] are symbolical as well as the city ; and in all cases where the interpretation is according to analogy, such a symbol, as we learn from Rev. xvii. 15, denotes a multitude of people. . . . The waters of the Euphrates, therefore, in their symbolical im- port, must represent that mighty stream of people of different nations and languages, which sustains to the mystical Babylon a relation analogous to that which the literal Euphrates did to the literal Babylon.'" Now, from the views, as here expressed, of the subject before us, it will appear obvious to the reader, that while the symbolical Euphrates is made to represent both the territorial seat of the papal power, and the community by which that power is supported, on the one hand ; the " city''' of Babylon, and the " river'' which flowed through it, are made to denote substantially the same thing, on the other. But what law of symbolical in- terpretation, I ask, will justify this? Such con- founding of things which differ, cannot but pro- duce the greatest confusion in the matter of prophetic exposition, and will discourage the hope, at least with some inquiring minds, of reaching any reliable solution of many of the prophetic symbols. Misapplied " laws" of pro- phetic interpretation, however, it should be borne in mind, only suggest the fallibility of the ex- positor. In the matter before us, without pro- fessing to be wise above what is written, our endeavor will be to point out the grounds of error in the above theory, and show what is " the mind of the Spirit" on this great subject. Let it be observed, then, in the outset, that the Apocalyptic mystical Euphrates of Rev. ix. and xvi., is THE KEY by which we are to deter- mine the thing symbolized. The hinge, there- fore, on which the entire question at issue turns, is, whether there is any connection between the " rivers and fountains of waters," Rev. xvi. 4 (or " the waters" which the revelator " saw," " where the whore sitteth," and which the angel inter- preted to signify "peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues," Rev. xvii. 15), and the "water of the great river Euphrates," Rev. ix. 14, ' Premium Easay on Erophetio Symbols, p. 116. and xvi. 12. If such a connection really exist", then it follows, that the symbolical Euphrates, as separate and distinct from the "city," signifies the community, etc., by which the power repre- sented by that mystic city is supported. If, on the contrary, it can be shown that no such con- nection exists between the passages in question, it will follow that, as in Isaiah viii. 1, and Jer. xlvii. 2, the prophets, speaking in the name of the Lord, tell the Jewish Church, that the waters of " the river strong and mighty" (i. e , the great river Euphrates) denote, — not in a mere figura- tive, but symbolic sense, — '■Hhe Mng of Assyria and all his glory ;" so, consistency requires that the symbol should, both in the sixth trumpet and sixth vial, be equally applied to the Turks or Ottomans, and that on the ground, that they possess the territories of ancient Assyria. In support of this latter view, we would pre- mise, that while, in some symbols, there is such a connection as that here contended for (as, for instance, between the sun, moon, and stars, either used in a spiritual or political sense, or as de- scribing the various members and relations of a family) ; yet, that no such connection is indicated as existing between the symbolical Euphrates (though borrowed from the literal river that flowed through Babylon) and the mystical city of that name, will, we submit, appear from the following : (1.) The symbol of Babylon in the Apocalypse, is employed without any reference to the locality of its object, which is situated in a part of the prophetic earth — the territory occupied by the ten kingdoms of papal Rome — far distant from ITSELF ; and. hence, the appropriateness of that symbol is derived solely from the moral character of that city. For, as it oppressed and led into captivity the literal Jerusalem, the ancient Jewish Church, it fitly represents the papal power of the WESTERN Roman empire, which in these latter days has enthralled and oppressed the true Chris- tian Church, on its part symbolized by " the holy city, Jerusalem." ' The future judgment of the mystic Babylon, as having " shed the blood of saints and of prophets," is accordingly announced in these appropriate terms: "Jle that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity, — here is the patience and faith of the saints." ' There being, then, such sufiBcient grounds for the independent symbolical meanings which are given to the river Euphrates and to the city of Babylon, formed on different but equally legitimate prin- I Rev. xxi. 2. »lb. xiii. 10, xiv. 18 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CKITICALLY EXAMINED. 161 ciples of interpretation, it is inconsistent to de- mand such an alliance between them as that required in the above theory. Nor can we pass unnoticed other facts.in this connection, confirm- atory of the view we advocate. As there is no analogy between the symbolic " loosing of the four angels bound on the banks of the great river Euphrates," under the sixth angelic trumpet, Rev. ix. 13, 14, and any corresponding event connect- ed with the mystic Babylon ; so, on the *other hand, there is an equal absence of all analogy between the " drying up" of the Euphratian river, as represented in chap, xvi; 12, and the state or condition of that power (papal Rome) at the period to which the prophecy refers. On the theory of the alleged connection between the two symbols, must not the population of apostate Christendom undergo a gradual yet immense reduction, approaching to extinction, some time before the pouring out of the last vial of wrath ? and is such an event anywhere predicted of mystic Babylon? So far from it, though that power has been shorn of some of its strength, in the loss of that universal " dominion" which it once swayed over the political affairs of the na- tions of Europe,' yet, on the above hypothesis, what, we respectfully ask, becomes of the pre- dicted "perilous times of the last days"' — the "falling away,"^ or general apostasy of professing Christendom, which is to precede the final de- velopment of this " mystery of iniquity !" Hence, in accordance with the prophecy of Daniel vii. 12, that the lives of the ten beasts should, after the loss, as above, of their political dominion, " be prolonged for a season and a time," we have a present verification of it, in that the population of most, if not all, the kingdoms of modern mys- tic Babylon is on the increase. Clearly, there- fore, the interpretation of the symbolical Euphra- tes which the above theory involves, is directly contradictory to the analogy of the prophetic word, and of fact. Again, (2.) The fallacy of the above alleged connec- tion between the symbolical Euphrates and the symbolical Babylon, will further appear if we consider, first, the error of affirming of the Apoc- alyptic Euphrates that it is symbolical, and of that of Isaiah viii. 7, and Jer. xlvii. 2, that it is literal. The Euphrates in these passages has the same meaning, being equally literal and equally symbolical. The object of prophetic description is one and the same literal Euphrates, symbolic- • Sea Dan. vii. 12. > 2 ThesB. ii. 1-12. a 2 Tim. iii. 1. ally denoting the forces or military power of the same territory of Assyria. Another error is, that of applying the Euphrates, in Isa. viii. 1, to denote the Babylonish population. So far from it, at the time referred to in that passage, Babylon was a power tributary to Assyria, or only one of its provinces or dependent States ; and it were about as true to affirm that the population of New York city is now the population of the whole United States, as to say that the Babylonish population is signified, in Isa. viii. 1, by the power of Assyria. Once more, (3.) The interpretation of the " rivers and foun- tains of waters," Rev. xvi. 4, as representing " peo- ples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues," Rev. xvii. 15, together with the symbolical im- port of "many" or "great waters," is of such general significance as the symbol of many peo- ple, that the right application of them depends entirely upon the connection in which they are found, and the description of the condition or agency ascribed to them. Take now, the " rivers and fountafns of waters" of chap. xvi. 4, which are represented as being turned into "blood." By what law of interpretation, I ask, can they be made to symbolize the same thing with the "loosing of the four angels bound on the Eu- phrates," chap. xvi. 14, or the " drying up" of that river, as described chap. xvi. 12? Cleai-ly, the former symbol,' though denoting many peo- ples, and which transpired under the sounding of the third trumpet, cannot be used to signify the same things with those which fall under the sounding of the sixth trumpet, and the pouring out of the sixth vial. There is nothing in the former symbol bearing the least analogy to the loosing of the four Euphratean angels, neither were " the great waters" of that river turned into blood. To the foregoing we add, (4.) That, to affirm of the Euphrates of the Apocalypse that it is symbolical, and of the Euphrates of Isaiah, that it is literal, when prop- erly analyzed, will be found to involve the foUow- 'm Coming and Keign of Christ, chap, xxxii. p. 872. the perfect day,'' what was closed to the percep- tion of one writer, may be (iwclosed to that of another; and hence, truth is to be eliminated by a careful comparison of evidence in support of this interpretation or that. The grounds of error of any theory, therefore, being clearly pointed out, and the basis of a true exposition being given, in the belief (as in charity we are bound to believe) that each writer has conscientiously "done what he could," according to the light vouchsafed him, to awaken the Church and thp world to a discovery of the impending crisis be- fore them, the responsibility, I submit, rests with those who reject such evidence. Instead, there- fore, of putting " the people of God on their guard against disappointment," in the event that, this or that " view is mistaken," ' we would rather say, that the subject is one which loudly calls upon each one for himself and herself, carefully, prayerfully, and diligently, to " read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest," the eyidences showing wherein "the truth of the matter" lay. Espe cially should we expect this of one who, differing from preceding writers, says of the numbers given above, " The near approach of those periods ren- ders it peculiarly important that the grounds on which they are held by their advocates to be the time when the 1260 years shall end, should bo carefully examined,'"' etc. Meeting this writer, therefore, on the ground of the implied possibility of arriving at a definite conclusion in the prem- ises, as set forth in the above passage, we turn to the subject in hand, with a view to present what, in our view, is revealed in Holy Scripture in reference to The period foe the commencement and CLOSE op the 2300 YEARS. We shall just lay before the reader some of the varying conclusions of several writers on this subject, followed by our replies. Sir Isaac Newton fixed on the year b. c. 538, for the commencement of the 2300 years ; another account says, 508 ; and a third adopts b. c. 456. In support of this latter number, by way of refu- tation of the others, this writer adduces the fol- lowing "presumptive proofs:" First, with the end of the 2300 years, " Dan. vii. 26. OUR BIBLK CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 165 the 2800 years, that event relating to the cleans- ing of the Christian sanctuary, while the prophecy relates to the sanctuary of the Jewish Church. Again: starting. with the year 784 b. c, for the commencement of the 2300 years, Mr, F. exceeds the period allotted to his grand calendar of seven times by no less a terra than 127 years. We leave it with tho admirers of this writer's theory, to reconcile the above calculations with his adop- tion elsewhere of a. d. 1864, as the termination of the times of the Gentiles, and the cleansing of the sanctuary, as best they can. Finally, on this subject, Mr. Lord, having asked the question, What is the relation of the 1260 days of Dan. vii. 25 an4 xii. 7, and of the 1290 and 1335 days of chap; xii. 8-11, to the 2300 days of chap. viii. 14 ? answers : '• It is held by some commentators, that the 2300 days of Dan. viii. 14, are to terminate at the same time as the time, times, and a half, and the twelve hundred and sixty days of Dan. xii. 7-11, and the forty-two months of Eev. xiii. 5." ' This, however, he de- clares, "is very far from being certain or probable."* Again, he says, " Others have supposed that the event denoted by the taking away of the daily sacrifice, was the interruption of it at Jerusalem, by the destruction of the temple and exile of the Jews by the Romans in a. d. 70 ; and thence have supposed that the 1260 years ended in a. d. 1330, and the 1290 in a. d. 1360. But this, he adds, " is wholly mistaken." ' And, having argued these points at considerable length, he reaches the fol- lowing conclusion, to wit, that the 2300 days are to terminate "with the 1290, not with the 1260. And then, quoting Dan. xii. 6, 7, he informs us that " the end is thus to be not only after the close of the 1260 days, but also after the disper- sion of the Israelites is ended :" also, that " the events, the accomplishment of which is to con- stitute the end, are to be the coming of Christ," etc., and adds, "It is foreshown in Zech. xiv. 1-5, that the coming of Christ with his saints, is to take place when the Israelites shall have paitially returned to the national land, and the antichris- tian armies shall attempt \;o drive them again into exile; and Rev. xix. 11-25, that the destruction of the wild beast is to take place at the second coming of Christ," ■* etc. Now, to all this we respectfully submit that, unless we greatly misjudge, one thing only re- mains, to enlighten us as to the precise period of the second coming of Christ. That is, to deter- ' Coming and Keign of Christ, oliap. xxxii. p. 889. 2 lb. » lb. p. 390. * Coming, etc. pp. 892, 898. mine the time of the close of the 1290 years, which, being one of the prophetical periods that Mr. L. tells us, in view of the many " errors" of other writers in reference to it, " should be corrected," ' the reader has a right to expect at his hand. But, with the declaration of Christ himself, regarding the EXACT time of his second coming, "Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father,',' ' present to his mind, Mr. L. leaves this date, not only, but the 1260 days, the "hour, the day, the month, and the year" of Rev. ix. 16, together with the 1335 days of Dan. xii. 11,' involved in the deepest uncertainty. It is in place here to remind the reader, that nearly all prophetical expositors of any note, are agreed in assigning to the 1260, the 1290, and the 1835 days, a common commencement; in other words, that they relate to one and the same great period, divided into three parts, the close of each of which, is to be marked by its appropriate event. The only exception to this view, that merits remark, is that of Mr. Faber, which we shall notice in its proper place. There is there- fore a connection between the 1260 and 1290 days. This would also seem to be admitted by Mr. L., who, advocating the identity of the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii., makes the 1260 days etc., integral parts of the 2800 days. Besides, Mr. L., and his coadjutor the Rev. Mr. Winthrop, have furnished the Church with "seven laws" for the interpretation of prophetic symbols, which we hold to be of great value when legitimately ap- plied, in opening to the understanding a knowl- edge of the prophetic word. Shall we then limit the application of these laws to an interpretation of the events of prophecy, to the exclusion of the dates which determine their commencement and end ? Is there any ground for attaching more of uncertainty to the one than to the other? Our own conviction and belief regarding the chronology of prophecy, always has been, and still is, that the mystical numbers of the Book of Daniel (and with which those of the Apocalypse synchronize), as connected with the vision revealed to him when taken as a whole, being given " for an appointed time," were nevertheless, " at the end, to speak and not lie."* If the prophet was commanded to " close up and seaV^ the vision, it was only " till THE TIME OF THE END."' That time arrived, "the wise," according to promise (Dan. xii, 10), shall be enabled so to " understand" it, as to know 1 Coming, etc. p. 872. " Matt. xxiv. 86. s Coming and Eeigu of Christ, pp. 873, 898. ' Habak. ii. 8. " Dan. viii. 26 ; xii. 8. 166 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGY CRITICAIiLY ESAMINED. when to "look up and lift up their heads" in certain expectancy of their approaching " redemp- tion,'' as a presea'vative against their being " over- taken as a thief in the night." ' We appeal, there- fore, if it does not follow, that to invest the sub- ject of these prophetical numbers with so much of uncertainty as to when they begin and end, is not vastly more calculated to " give a dangerous shock to many, and drive them into perplexity, discouragement, and unbelief," than are those discrepancies so liberally charged against other writers. We will now state, in few words, what we ap- prehend of the relative position of all the prophet- ical dates of the Book of Daniel and of the Apoca- lypse, to the period immediately following the close of that called the " falness of the Gentiles" (with but two exceptions in reference to the latter, to wit, the " three days and a half," or years, that are to intervene between the death and resurrection of the two witnesses,' and the period of " a thous- and years," mentioned Eev. xx. 1-6), which is, THAT THEY ALL END WITH THE LAST OF THE 6000tH TEAR FROM THE CREATION AND FALL. On this hypothesis, it will of course follow, that those predicted events which are to transpire after the close of the 6000th year of the world, belong to an uNCHROivoLOGicAL period, which circumstance furnishes the ground upon which our blessed Lord, when speaking of the time of his second coming, declared, " of that day and hour knoweth no man." While, therefore, prophetical expositors may ap- proximate to the truth, when treating of those events — signs — which are to precede, accompany, and follow Christ's second coming; yet we must insist — which we shall show in the sequel — that they greatly err, when they transfer to this un- chronoloffical period, those prophetic dates which run out before it commences. We are therefore constrained to withhold our assent to the theory on this subject, as set forth in the following ex- tract of the distinguished Mr. Fletcher, of Madely, in a letter to the Rev. John Wesley. He says : " It is worthy of observation, that as the tyranny of Antichrist will last 1260 years; so his last raging, or that tribulation which will be so un- common, shall last also 1260 common days, and not prophetical ones ; ' because, for the elect's sake, those days shall be shortened,' according to our Lord's merciful promise. This observation," . he adds, " will cast a great light upon all those numbers, and prevent many objections," etc. But ' 1 Thess. V. 2 ; 2 Pet. iii. 10 ; Eev. iii. 3, 2 Eev. xi. 7-11. in reply, we submit, whether the "objections" will not greatly diminish, by applying the short- ening of the tribulation to the last " generation" in which it is to transpire, than to affix it to a chro- nological period of 1260 days, or three and a half years, which, besides that it is too short a period for the occurrence of those events which belong to this era, would seem to infringe upon our Lord's declaration, " Of that day and that hour knoweth no man," etc. Having thus disposed of the afore-mentioned theories on the subject of the commencement and close of the 2300 years, we submit the following as the true exposition of them. The reader will bear in mind, that with Scott, Paber, Elliott, and a host of others, we hold the "little horn" in Daniel's second vision, chap, viii., to refer to the Mohammedan power, ot eastern Antichrist, as distinct from that of Dan. vii., which relates to the papal power, or western Antichrist. It is also well to premise in passing, that, in the interpretation of the above prophecy, "the records of ancient history must answer the pro- phetic description of the commencement of the vision ; and the records of modern history, after 2300 -years intervening, that of the termination of the vision. Also that these epochs, if rightly fixed, will prove strongly marked and well-deter- mined epochs," thus furnishing us with a double argument and a double test to the determination of the exact epoch required. This period, then, it is to be remembered, com- prehends the duration of the whole series of events predicted in the vision ; of them^ and of no more. For the question of the one angel to the other angel is not, " How long shall be a part of the vision?" but, "How long shall be the vision?'' called a vision, to distinguish it from that which is its principal subject, " the vision respecting the daily sacrifice." Nor again is it said, " How long shall be the vision from some era (as of Daniel's seeing it,' for example) antecedent to the com- mencement of the vision ;'' or '^from some era (as of Alexander's victories)' subsequent to its com- mencement" but simply, " How long shall be the vision?"* i. e., of what duration from its com- mencement to its close ? What, then, marks the date of its commence- ment? "I saw in a vision," says the prophet, " and behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns : and the two horns were high ; but one was higher than the other, and ' According to Mr. Frere. s According to Bp. Nowton. 8 Dan. viii. 18. OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 167 the higher came [or had come] up last. I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward, so that no beasts might stand before him; neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand." ' Let it then be observed, that as with the tak- ing of Babylon by Cyrus began the renown of the Medo-Persian empire, and that its supremacy continued to the time of Xerxes, and no further ; so the commencement of the vision must be dated either from Cyrus' taking Babylon, b. c. 538 or 536 ;' or Xerxes' defeat in Greece, b. c. 480. The interval, as history attests (if we except a few isolated defeats, as in Scythia and Marathon), was marked by the unchecked victorious pushing of the two-horned ram, " so that no beast could stand before it," and so continued down to the time of Xerxes^ expedition against the Greeks, when, at the battles of Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale, Persian pre-eminence received a mortal blow, from which it never recovered. Hence- forward, the ram was no longer enabled to " do according to his will."' It is clear, therefore, that the vision cannot be dated earlier than b. c. 538- or 536, nor later than b. c. 480. This, it will be perceived, leaves a space of only 56 years, within which to fix the exact epoch. In either case, the 2300 years, if reckoned from the former dates, must have ended in a. d. 1762 or 1764; and if from the latter, in a. d. 1820. It requires, however, I submit, but an impar- tial glance at the history of the Persian empire during the above interval of 56 years, to deter- mine the point in question. For, first, though the successes of the two-horned ram, Cyrus, would seem to verify the commencement of the 2300 years with b. c. 638 or 536, so far as ancient his- tory is concerned ; yet the modern era at which this number would have expired, furnishes no corresponding event to that indicated by the prophecy, viz., the overthrow of the Turkish pow- er, or the cleansing of the Christian countries or the Jewish sanctuary from the Mohammedan yoke. The same remarks will apply, second, to the first Persian expedition into Greece, that end- ed with the battle of Marathon, b. c. 490, there being no corresponding event in modem history to the close of the 2300 years, if reckoned from that date, to indicate the overthrow, etc., of the Turkish power. There remains, third, the era of Xerxes' expedition, of which the setting out from Susa is determined by a famous eclipse of the sun 1 Dan. viii. 2-4. > Dan. viii. 4. ' So Clinton, Fasti Hellenici. to the year b. o. 481,' and which arrived at Ther- mopylsB soon after the summer solstice, in the year following. That this event fully meets the terms of the prophecy in every particular, will, we opine, appear from what follows : The epoch in question is expressly set forth by Daniel himself, chap. xi. 2, as one prominent, and to be noted in the history of Persian greatness. " Behold, there shall stand up three kings in Per- sia (Cambyses, Smerdis, and Darius) ; and the fourth (Xerxes) shall be far richer than they all : and hy his strength, through his , riches, he shall stir up all against the realm of Ghecia" etc. Now, mark. It was at the above-named date, B. c. 481, that the two-horned ram, eager for ocmquest, collected his whole strength in prepara- tion for conflict with the united forces of the Grecian he-goat: and, so general was the im- pression "that none could deliver out of the ram's hand," that, as a matter of self-preserva- tion, many of the smaller republics of Greece it- self succumbed to the demanded acknowledg- ment of subjection to the Persian monarch, by the delivery of earth and water. And yet, Xerxes, with his waving banners of twenty-nine tributary nations accompanying (as Herodotus describes it), collected from Scythia north to Ethio- pia south, and from India east to Thrace and Libya west, having advanced westward across Asia Minor to Sardis, northward across the Hel- lespont into Thrace and Macedon, and southward from Macedon to its conflict with the Greeks in the passes of Thessaly, was there humbled by the much smaller number, yet superior valor of the latter, and Persian supremacy ended by the eman- cipation of the Asiatic Greeks from a foreign yoke. Thus we have the testimony of ancient history to verify the commencement of the 2300 years with 481 b. c. Finally, counting from this era, the 2300 years ended in a. d. 1820. In this year, as modem history attests, the Greek insurrection broke out, from which began that dismemberment of the provinces of the Turkish empire, which has ever silice been going on ; and by which, from Greece, from Moldavia and Wallachia, from Algiers, Egypt, and the Holy Land, taken in connection with the events of recent date, is clearly indi- cated a recession, to an immense extent, of the overflowing waters of the mystic Euphrates. But more on this subject anon. We now pass to a consideration of the two dates which form integral parts of the 2300 years. 1 See Dr. Halos' Clironol., vol. iv. p. 140 (Sd Eng. ed.) 168 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. Having shown, we submit, that the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii are not identical, and hence, that the 1260 days, or years, of Dan. vii. 25, though running parallel with the 2300 years, yet form no part of it, we proceed to a like dem- onstration, that the "five months" of Kev. ix. 5, 10, and "the hour, the day, the month, and the year" of Rev. ix. 14, 16, are connected with that prolonged number. I. But in the first place, as introductory to the subject in hand, let us take a brief view of that fearful power described under the sounding of the fifth Apocalyptic trumpet, Rev. ix. 5, 10. Of this, an analysis of the symbolic imagery, as set forth in the first eleven verses of that chapter, will demonstrate that it is descriptive of the Saracenic " Woe," which, in the righteous judg- ment of God, was to be inflicted on the apostate Eastern Church, especially at the hand of the " little horn" of Dan. viii. 8, 9. Our limits will not admit, neither is it necessary, that we should dwell at length upon a comparison of the stiiking adaptation of the symbols employed in the above- named passage, with the characteristics of the power there described. If the reader will turn to our historic evidence of the Arabian origin of this "little horn," as given in pages 154-158 of this work, and to our description of the religious character of the " king of fierce countenance," as portrayed in page 158, he will be enabled readily to detect the synchronic features of the same Saracenic or Turkish power here delineated by St. John. It will be well, however, to observe, by the way, that as a firmamental star in prophecy de- notes a civil or ecclesiastical ruler, and a fallen firmamental star one of these rulers as degraded in personal dignity and rank, so the chapter un- der consideration opens with a description of the chief and originator of Islamism, as "a star fallen from heaven." How applicable this to Moham- med, the great Arabian impostor? He was by birth of the princely house of Koreish, governors of Mecca. But at his birth his grandfather and, soon after, his father died, on which the govern- orship of Mecca, headship of the tribe, together with the keys of the Caaba, passed into the hands of another branch of the family, and he became an outcast- orphan. Hence, in referring back to this period of his life, Mohammed observes ; " Cadijah believed in me, when men despised me ; and relieved my wants, when I was poor and per- secuted in the world." But, though Mohammed had lost the key of the Caaba, another key, " the key of the bottomless pit" — the abyss of " the father of lies" — was put into his hands ; and with it he " opened" that '■'■pit," the "smoke" of which, issuing from the cave of Hera, near Mecca, where he concocted his Koran, ^^ darkened the sun and the air" For, after the " seven years of exile" which followed the first promulgation of his mission, " the fugi- tive missionary," says Gibbon, " was enthroned as a prince and prophet in his native country. It was then he assumed to have the key of God, and made it to Islamites what the cross was to Christians." The key, in alto relievo, over the gate of justice of the Moorish Alhamra, in the very centre of its arch, is evidence of the identity of the fact with the above symbol. And now, let us glance at those Apocalyptic symbols, descriptive of the agents who were to execute his purposes. Here we have the " lo- custs,'^ which, moving in countless swarms, de- noted the vast hordes with which the invader should punish the guilty lands marked out for the vengeance of heaven. Their "horse-like" ap- pearance signified that the invading forces would mainly consist of cavalry. Their " lion-likeness," in exact analogy to Daniel's " king of fierce coun- tenance," indicated their daring and invincible ferocity. The " scorpion sting," though not pro- ducing death, yet infiicting the most agonizing pain, points out the " torment" of those who re- ceived it. And finally, the locality from whence these locusts were to emanate, is clearly from the East, for which, compare Exod. v. 13, with Judg. vi. 5, and Deut. viii. 15. The whole zoology, therefore, is purely Arabian. But there are other characteristics further demonstrative of the people and nation here delineated. They are represented to have " tlie faces of men" as de- noting the courage and aspect of man ; " the long hair of women," indicative of the effeminacy of the woman ; the " breastplate," symbolic of invul- nerability in battle ; and " crowns" adorned with "gold" upon their heads, significant of continuous victory : peculiarities, we remark, which will not apply either to the Goths, Greeks, or Romans, but which are purely Arabic. The next particular noticeable in this symbolic drapery, respects the objects of their vengeance. And here, a limit was set to their mission. They were "cominanded not to hurt the grass of the earth, nor any green thing, neither any tree ;" a commission, be it observed, exactly coinciding with that given to the Saracens, as prescribed in the Koran. The order of the caliph runs thus: " Destroy no palm-trees, nor any fields of corn, cut down no fruit-trees." No. They were only OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 169 to punish those " who had not the seal of God in their foreheads :" and these they were not to " kill" but only to " torment." Accordingly, at the period of which we now spealf, that apostasy of the Eastern or Greek Church, instigated by the heresy of Nestorius about 200 years before, viz., in a. d. 429, and which is described under the sounding of the third Apocalyptic trumpet, Rev. viii. 10, 11, had attained to maturity. Their " transgression^^ in the early part of the seventh century, " had come to the fully ' Hence the period designated for the appearance upon the prophetic platform of the "little horn" of Dan, viii. 8, 9. Yes. " The king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences^'' etc., was to " stand uji" in " the latter time" of the divided kingdom of the four-headed leopard, as a chastising rod in God's hand for their punishment. Gibbon tells us, that the Christians of the seventh century had " relapsed into the semblance of paganism, their public and private vows were addressed to images and relics that disgraced the temples of the earth, and the throne of the Almighty was darkened by a cloud of martyrs, saints, and angels, the objects of pub- he veneration." But the day of righteous retri- bution had now come. Mohammed, himself, told his followers that their mission was to execute judgment against those idolaters of Christendom. This, accordingly, brings to view the last particu- lar symbolized in the above prophetic imagery, viz.. The period of the " five months" assigned to their punishment, under this Saracenic Woe. But the great question is. Does the chronology of his- tory verify the truth of the prophecy ? The an- swer is, that in a. d. 612, the Arabian impos- tor, Mohammed, first proclaimed his mission : — "Who," said he "will be my vizier?" Ali re- plied, "0 prophet! I am the man! Whoever rises against thee, I will dash out his teeth, tear out his eyes, break his legs, and rip him up !" Aye, such was " the king of fierce countenance," who, in accordance with the prophecy, was to be -'placed aver''' the " locust" army, and such the character of the leader who, from this date, was to commence that terrible course of ruthless and inexorable proselytism to the religion of Moham- med, which it was his design from the beginning should become universal. That "religion," says Hallam, "is essentially a military system; the people of Arabia found in the law of their proph- et, not a license, hut a command to desolate the 1 Dan. viii. 22 world" Hence the two great principles explain- ed in the Koran and embodied in the Moham- medan creed, which have imparted so much of military enthusiasm to that people, are predesti- nation as synonymous with fatalism, and the promise of special sensual enjoyments to those who should fall in the field of battle. We repeat. It was from this date, viz., a. d. 612, that, after embracing the tenets and imbibing the spirit of this false superstition, the Saracenic hordes of cavalry issued in propagandist swarms with the fierceness of lions, and the fleetness of horses, and the stings of scorpions, upon guilty Christendom. We shall now see, by an impartial reference to history, the completest evidence of the fulfilment of this prophecy. Having commenced the work of devastation, as above, the Saracenic invaders who had issued from the desert in a. d. 629, fol- lowed it up in A. D. 636 by a descent upon Da- mascus and Jerusalem like a resistless and over- flowing torrent ; and the next year a Moham- medan mosque was built upon the very site of the ancient temple of Solomon, and the cry of the muezzin was heard where the voice of inspiration had been uttered before : and, to show how truly the punishment they inflicted was "as the tor- ment of a scorpion when he striketh a man" (lead- ing its wretched victims in vain to desire and seek death), the Christians they spared were tor- mented with, the most cruel and protracted op- pression — their rites were mocked at, their wor- ship degraded, their persons assailed, and insults, without ceasing, were heaped upon their church- es, and the common language addressed to them was, "Ye Christian dogs, ye know your option — the Koran, the tribute, or the sword !" Nor was the range of the invaders confined to this narrow limit. The crescent also waved vic- torious over Egypt, Spain, Persia, and India; and, as an illustration of the prophecy of Daniel, that this little Arabian horn should " wax exceed- ing great," and that it should " destroy wonder- fully, and prosper and practise, and destroy the mighty and the holy people,"' etc., it is worthy of note, that in ten years from a. d. 634, the Saracens had reduced 3060 cities, destroyed 4000 churches, and raised 1400 mosques. Equally decisive is history as to the most hteral verifica- tion of the prophecy, that this "little horn" should " wax exceeding great toward the south, and toward the east, and," especially, 'Howard the pleasant land,"' where, says Daniel, "he shall plant the tabernacle of his palaces between the I Dan. viii. 10, 24, etc. 2 lb. vor. 9. 170 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED seas, IN THE GLORIOUS HOLY MOUNTAIN. And thus, if we except a few reverses, the conquests of the dynasty of the Omraiades continued to " prosper,'' till, between a. d. 155 and 762, its once united power was rent in twain, and the eastern dynasty of the Abyssides became the antagonist of that of the west. Here, then (i. e., from A. D. 612, the date of the rise of the Mo- hammedan "little horn," to a. d. 762, when it began to decay), we have the exact period of 150 years, or the "five months" of thirty prophetic days each, or literal years, of the Apocalypse. II. The next integral number of the 2300 years — the "hour, the day, the month, and the year," of Rev. ix. 14, 15. We have, in the Apoc- alypse, a description of the manner in which he is to be destroyed, in exact analogy with the above terms. This is to be obtained by a refer- ence to the synchronism of the sixth vial with that of the sixth trumpet. As both relate to the same train of events and the same period, we read, Rev. xvi. 12, "And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates" (which we have seen denotes the territorial mili- tary power of the Turks which skirted its banks),' " AND THE WATBR THEREOF WAS DRIED UP," CtC. ; language which signifies the gradual evaporation of that power, like the drying up of a mighty river. Let us now turn to the pages of history. Upon the close of the year a. d. 762, the Abyssidian dynasty, far east in Bagdad, under the reigns of Mohadi and Haroun al Reschid, from 781 to 805, had risen to a brief but temporary splendor and revival into military enterprise and success. But, the eflfeminacy, luxury, licentiousness, and loss to both prince and people of the fervor of that re- hgious fanaticism which once inspired them, pre- vailed to such an extent, that, in a. d. 841, the reigning caliph, distrusting the martial spirit of the Arabs, hired a band of 50,000 Turkomans from beyond the Oxus, to be the support of the caliphate of Bagdad. These, however, revolted against and deposed the caliph. Meanwhile, the Fatimites, descendants of AH, Mohammed's first vizier, at the opening of the tenth century, as- serted their claims both to independent political sovereignty and to the caliphate itself; and hav- ing reduced Africa, Egypt, and Syria, with Cairo as their capital, they became known as the third caliphate of Islamism. This circumstance great- ly accelerated the ruin of the Abyssidian caliph- ate of Bagdad, which continued to languish more 1 Dan. xi. 45. » See pp. 160-162 of this work. and more, until the Persian Moslem dynasty of the Bowides, intei'posing on account of the fac- tions then prevalent, advanced to Bagdad iu a. d. 934, stripped the caliph of his secular office and supremacy, and reduced him to his spiritual func- tions as chief pontiff of Islamism, the mere phan- tom thenceforward of departed power. Thence we pass on to the period for the introduction upon the prophetic stage, of the things treated of under the sounding of the sixth trumpet, Rev. ix. 13, 14, and the pouring out of the sixth vial, chap. xvi. 12. The symbolic imagery that pervades verses 13-19 inclusive, of the ninth chapter, so clearly points out the same power with that described in the preceding first eleven verses, as to render superfluous any additional explanations, with the exception of a few observations in reference to the command which issued " from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel, which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which are hound in the great river Euphrates." We have seen, that as the term Euphrates, in Isa. viii. 7, was employed symbol- ically to denote the territory of the Assyrian army which bordered upon that river; so, by analogy, the twice-repeated phrase, as a symbol in Rev. ix and xvi., under the sixth trumpet and vial, cannot represent any other than the Turkish power, they being no less borderers upon the Euphratian territory before their overflowing, than were the Assyrians — yea, inhabitants of the same track. By the binding of the four angels, therefore, upon its banks, is indicated that pause in those judgments which had been going on un- der the previous symbols, consequent upon the cessation of the conquests of the Moors. And now, the Saracenic empire at Bagdad, on the Euphrates, being rent in twain, these four angels, — the same with the tempest-restraining angels mentioned Rev. vii. 1,— are released from their confinement, to burst forth anew upon that state of repose into which, between a. d. 934 and 1057 — an interval of 123 years — the nations of Chris- •tendom had fallen. The next interval which followed, was that be- tween the departure of the Turks from Bagdad in A. D. 1057, and the capture of Constantinople in A. D. 1453. It was filled up by a series of the sorest judgments, inflicted upon the nations of Christendom at the hands, first, of Togrul Beg, as the head of the Turkish empire, and protector and governor of Mecca; then by Alp Arslan, called the valiant lion,- who, though defeated in his invasion of Constantinople — the time for its OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 171 fail not having then fully arrived — yet the Tuiks, Having recruited and consolidated their forces, ■with the sultan Hincmar as their leader, captured that city in A. d. 1453, which for ccnturips had held before the world the position of "the queen and mistress of tiie East." If, now, we reckon from the time the Turks left Bagdad, which was in a. d. 1057, to the capture of Constantinople by that power in a. d. 1453, we shall find it amounts to precisely 396 ye.-irs, in complete time. Then turn to the period assigned to the loos- ing of the four Euphratian angels, viz., " an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year" and compute it agreeably to the laws of symbolic interpretation, as explained in pages 108, 109 of this work, thus : as there are 366^ days in a year, ^'■each day for a year," we have 365i years + a month or 30 years + a day or 1 year + an hour or 15 days = 396 years in complete time. I submit, so remarkable a coincidence cannot be fortuitous. We have now presented to the reader a view of the Apocalyptic description of the two series of judgments that were to fall upon apostate Christendom at the hands of the Turk*, together with the periods assigned to each, as integral parts of the 2300 years. We have also seen that that number, commencing b. c. 480, closed in A. D. 1820. But, as with the kingdoms de- noted by the " ten horns" of Daniel's nondescript beast, whose " dominion was taken away," while " their lives were prolonged for a season and a time"^ so with the prophetic Arabian, Saracenic, or Turkish "little horn" of this prolonged vision. Having executed the two acts of judgment upon apostate Christendom, which we have just de- scribed, it also, like the Babylonian, Medo-Per- sian, Grecian, and Koman powers, denoted by the four parts of the colossal image, and the four beasts of Daniel,° was doomed to destruction. And hence our next and final argument, VI. Demonstrative of the distinction between the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii. We will place the passages relating to them, in this connection, in opposite columns, that the reader may see at a glance that they cannot refer to one and the same power. held even till the beust was slain, and his body destroy- ed, and given, to the iurning flame,'''' ' and " he shall come to his end, and none shall help him." Thf First. Dan. vii. 11. " I beheld then because of tl"? voice of the great words e '.iL-k the horn spake : I bo The Second. Dan. viii. 25 ; xi. 45. "He"(i.e., "the king of fierce countenance") sJiall ie broken without hand," . . . » Dan. vii. 12. s lb. ii. and vii. Here, then, it is obvious, tjiat the expressions employed in reference to the mode of national death of the second "little horn," is entirely differ- ent fiom that relating to the first. The former is to be "killed," and " his body given to the burning flame," at a time when his power has culminated to its highest point. Whereas the latter is to " come to his end" in a manner extraordinary, i. e., his death is to be a protracted and lingering one — a gradual decay, or wasting away of his once gigantic proportions. Hence the Apocalyp- tic description of the manner of it, as given in Rev. xvi. 12, by the symbol of the " drying up of the mystical Euphrates," under the outpouring of sixth vial. So, also, there is a difference in the agencies to be employed to effect their destruc- tion. The "little horn" of Dan. vii. is to be " consumed by the spirit of the mouth, and de- stroyed by the brightness of the coming," of the Lord Jesus Christ." Whereas, that of Dan. viii. is to result from a variety of causes, e. g., an evaporation, or consumption and the like, by which his power should be at length exhausted. Finally, there is a difference as to the time ap- pointed for their destruction. At the overthrow of the national polity of the Jews by the Romans in A. D. 70, those wlio escaped death were to be " carried captive into all nations," not only, but '- Jkeusalem" was to " trodden down of the Gen- tiles, UNTIL the times of the Gentiles should be fulfilled." Now, though Jerusalem has, at dif- ferent periods, been invaded and trodden under foot by nearly all the different Gentile nations, yet, since the fall of Constantinople, in a. d. 1453, the Turkish crescent has surmounted the dome of the mosque of Omar on the Mount Moriah, and the muezzin has summoned the Islamite to prayer from its surrounding battlements; while the Jewish occupant of the Holy City, poor, de- graded, and oppressed, can only obtain, by taxa- tion, the privilege of bending his suppliant knee at his " wailing place" beneath the western wall, to pray for the coming of his Messiah. But, though now thus " trodden under foot" by their Turkish masters, when the above specified period shall have run its course, that Turkish master and his blasphemous imposture will, together, expire forever. He cannot survive the period of time denoted by the word " until." Whereas the de- > Consult, also, 2 Thoss. ii. 8 ; Ecv. xviii. 8; xix. 20; XX. 10. ' Thess. ii. 8. i72 OUR BIBLE CHEONOLOGT CRITICALLY EXAMINED. struction of the other "little horn," i. e., the pa- pal, in its last form, takes place during the short- running course of the unchronoloaical period which follows the (-III6B or tne otJipj Slill the question presents itselt^ — and it is one of momentous import — llo-.v are we to deter- mine the commencement of the period assigned to the drying up of the mystical Euphrates? To this we reply, we have only to open the page of history since a. d. 1820, in order to discover " how far the angel's vial has taken effect, and in what manner it has performed its commissioned work. . . During the wars of the French Rev- olution, while the armies of France desolated Spain, Portugal, Germany, Holland, Russia, Prus- sia, Italy, and Austria, Turkey escaped compara- tively harmless. . , The Ottoman Empire, by a long and unwonted good tbrtune, found itself, at the commencement of this era (1820), freed at once from foreign war and domestic rebellion. . . . Peaceful within and. without, she ap- peared to the world, and was respected, as a pow- erful and mighty nation.'' But, let iis now contrast with this, the condition of that once powerful nation, commencing with this very year a. d. 1820, and we shall see, that, though then blessed with more than ordinary re- pose, yet it was but the fearful calm which often denotes a coming storm. It was in the summer of 1820, that Ali Pasha of Albania, declared his independence of the Sublime Porte. Judgment has, since that period, down to the present time, been wonderfully poured out upon her ; — whether it has been effected by the hand of man, or more directly by the hand of God. She has suffered from internal commotions and foreign aggressors ; from plague and pestilence ; from conflagration and inundation ; from storms and earthquake ; as the stars in their courses fought against Sisera, so the elements and other natural phenomena have fought against the Turk. For example : In the summer of 1820, Ali Pasha of Albania, declared his independence of the sublime Porte. In the " untoward" battle of Navarino, the em- pire lost its fleet ; Russia, in the campaign of the Balkan, and the rebel Mohammed Ali, deprived it of its armies. In one battle fought by the latter with Hussein Pasha in Syria, the Turks lost 70.000 men. The Sultan himself, in subduino- an msurrection between the people and the Jan- izaries in Constantinople in 1825, slew 30,000 of tnem in cold blood. By other insurrections, the fairest and moat powerful ^rowmces have been dissevered— Greece, Egypt, Syria, and Servia. Moiaavia and Wallachia, having revolted, were for years occupied by Russia, and which even the peace that followed the late Crimean war has not wholly restored to the Porte. The French have wrested away Algiers ; Albania and Bosnia are still torn more or less by internal discords and seditions; while the comparatively recent victorious march of Ibrahim Pasha nearly to the gates of Constantinople, betrayed the total weak- ness of the whole empire. And, if we turn to the disastrous effects pro- duced by other causes, we find fifteen thousand houses destroyed by two conflagrations, whilst Messrs. Walsli and Hartly were in Constantinople ; and six thousand more have been destroyed so recently as in August, 1833. The great cities of Aleppo and Antioch, with several neighboring towns, have been almost entirely destroyed by earthquakes, 14,000 inhabitants having perished in the former alone. The plague has committed unprecedented ravages in other cities : Bagdad, out of a population of 80,000 persons, lost 55,000 by that scourge, together with an inundation which shut the inhabitants up, and this in the short space of eight weeks ! Hillah, the modern Babylon, lost its entire population of 10,000 souls by the same scourge, and only wild beasts were found in its streets. In a. d. 1814, one fifth of the entire population of the provinces was com- puted to have fallen victims to it, so that in nu- merous instances, the crops remained ungatbered for want of hands; and in 1816, the province of Bosnia lost half of its inhabitants by the same judgment 1 The cholera has since been as ac- tively accomplishing the same work of destruc- tion, 15,000 persons having perished by it at Bassora, while hundreds are reported to have died daily at Alexandria, Cairo, Smyrna, etc. "The Bombay Gazette" of August, 1831, gives an account of an unknown pestilence which had completely depopulated Mecca, Medina, Jedda, and other cities. Again : we find the predicted drying up of the resources of this empire, if we turn to its tvealth : the inhabitants generally, are miserably impov- erished by taxation, exactions, and despotic rob- beries ; to which may be added the fact of the government paying for the large purchases it makes, in a currency greatly debased, and which it refuses to receive back again in the payment of taxes and imposts. We will only add, finally, that the national enthusiasm of the inhabitants is proverbially fled. The unfolding of the sacred banner, which formerly inspired them with so much of military ardor and devotedness of spirit, now scarcely produces any effect — thev are dia- OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 173 pirited and reckless of their fate ! M. de Lamar- tine, tlie renowned historian, orator, and poet, speaking in the Chamber of Deputies, in Paris, on the subject of the drying up or progressive wasting away of tho Ottoman empire, said, " The Ottoman empire in no empire at all ; it is a mis- shapen agglomeration of different races without cohesion between them, with mingled interests, with- out a language, without laws, without religion, without unity or stability of power. You see that the breath of life which animated it, namely, re- ligious fanaticism, is extinct. You see that its fatal and blinded administration has devoured the race of conquerm-s, and that Turkey is per- ishing FOR WANT OP Turks !" We see then, that from a. d. 1820, the Turk- ish nation has rapidly wasted ; and that at this present hour, the last streamlet is hardly discov- erable in the once full and overflowing channel of the great -Euphrates. True, first, the shadows of Eussia and Britain, and at this moment, the Anglo-French alliance, by a strange combination, spread over it to prevent its utter evaporation. They will not succeed. God has pronounced its doom, and no power on earth can prevent its speedy accomplishment. "He shall come to HIS end, and none shall help him !" SECTION V. The subject of the prophetic numbers continued. The next prophetic numbers in order are, the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days of Daniel. Syn- chronic with the first of these — the 1260 days, Dan. vii. 25, and xii. 1 — are the " thousand two hundred and threescore days," Kev. xi. 2, 3 ; the " twelve hundred and sixty days," Rev. xi. 3-6 ; and "the time, times, and half a time," Rev. xii. 14. In regard to these important prophetical dates in the great " calendar" of mystical time, we observe, in the first place, that, so far as we know, all expositors, except Mr. Faber, whether they Lave understood the " days" literally, or as signi- fying years, are united in considering them as three divisions of one and the same period, the last two being merely elongations of the first, and hence, that they have a common commence- ment ; the 1290 days being an addition of 30 years to the 1260, and the 1336 a further term of 45 years to the 1290. But as with the preceding numbers, so here : prophetical expositors differ as to their character- istics, the objects to which they relate, and the time of their commencement and termination. As it respects the first, viz., their characteristics (as we have said in the preceding pages), while some writers, holding that the two little horns of Dan. vii. and viii. are identical, apply them alike to the western papal antichrist ; others (of whom we are one), affirm that they relate to two dis- tinct powers, the former to the Papal, the latter to the Mohammedan. And hence, while, on the former hypothesis, the 1260 days are made an integral part of the 2300 days of Dan. viii. 14 ; we, on the contrary, restrict them to the career of the little papal horn of Dan. vii. 8 ; and hence, that they form a part of, and end with the mys- tical " SEVEN times" of Lcv. xxvi. and Dan. iv., at the close of the period called "the fulness of the Gentiles." In the next place, as to the objects of the ven- geance of this little papal horn. While some ex- positors restrict the 1260 days of Daniel and the Apocalypse to the Jews only ; others (and ourself with them), hold that the career of said " little horn" during this period, in the exercise of his ecclesiastico-political functions, respects, if not ex- clusively, yet principally, the Christians of the Oentile Church. History verifies that, prior to the appearance of this "little horn" upon the prophetical platform in the sixth century, Antio- chus Epiphanes, and the Romans either in their united or divided state, were the only two powers that desolated and destroyed the Jews. Occa- sional edicts against them, on the part of the lat- ter, during the course of the 1260 years, may have occurred. But, the "saints," with whom this " little horn" principally " waged war," ' and against whom he "prevailed" by "wearing them out," etc., were the Christians who, encircled with- in the embrace of the ten European dynasties that were subject to his dominion under his ec- clesiastico-political character, refused to receive the impress of his image upon their foreheads.' In regard to the question of time, the com- mencement and ending of these prophetical num- bers depends upon whether they are to be under- stood literally, a day for a day, or mystically, a day for a year. It is argued by the advocates of the literal theory, that if days were intended by the prophet Daniel to signify years, it would fol- low, that the Church would be enabled to so ac- curately determine the beginning and end of each in reference to the time of the second com- • Dun. vii. 21, 25. ' Compare Rov. .\iii. 16 witli xx. 4. 174 OUR BIBLE CHKONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. ing of Christ, as to falsify his declaration, " of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." Also, that the frequent admonitions of Christ and his apostles to their converts, that " the end of all things was at hand," and that " the coming of the Lord was drawing near," etc., as incentives to watchfulness and prayer, " would have been no better than a pious fraud ;" and finally, that, as St. Paul, in 1st Thess. iv. 14-18, "speaks of the resurrection of the saints as of an event which might occur during their lifetime ;" and in 2d Thess. ii. 1-12, predicts of the last apostasy and the future rising of "the man of sin,'' etc., "as of events which were yet to intervene before the advent and the resurrection ;" therefore, that he "did not believe that this apostasy should last 1260 years;" and, that his "ignorance" of such a fact " must be regarded as strong presumptive evidence, that the rise and duration of such apos- tasy had never been expressly foretold." But, I submit, that the fallacy of the above reasoning will appear evident, if we consider, first, that the literal interpretation of these num- bers (being applied by its advocates to the short vnchronoloffical period that is to follow the close af " the times of the Gentiles") is subversive of the truth of our Lord's declaration, •' of that day and hour knoweth no man," etc., just in propor- tion with the difference, in determining the time of the second advent, that there is between 1260 days and 1260 years. It would be equivalent to the affirmation, that the time of that event is ^^ expressly foretold." 2d. By turning to pages 113-115, of this work, the reader will see the qround on which Christ and his apostles warned the New Testament Christians that the " coming 'of the Lord was drawing nigh, on the one hand ;" and a vindication of St. Paul against being " ig- norant" of the prolonged period of his predicted apostasy, etc., on the other. The error here is, the overleaping the period assigned to thcf full ac- complishment of these and the other prophetical numbers. The second coming of Christ is an isolated event, which follows their close. Hence the impossibility of determining the '■'■ day and hour" when it transpires. We now pass to a view of what is " noted in the Scriptures of truth," ' and verified by history, of the commencement and end of these prophet- ical dates ; in reference to which, as of the pre- ceding, there are differences of opinion, even on the part of several distinguished writers, who 'Dan. adopt the year-day theory of interpretation. Of these, it will be quite sufficient to our purpose to adduce the following : First, Mr. Faber's theory. Having erected his great work, " The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy," on the hypothesis that the 1260 days are "a moiety of the complete period of 'seven times,' " or 2520 years, he says, that " all those events must be included, which are connected with the times of Gentile apostasy, and within the boun- daries of which all those dates must be included that are specified by Daniel and St. John." ' And then, having fixed upon the year b. c. 656, as the commencement of the 2520 years, which makes them to expire a.d. 1864, he so adjusts the 1260 and 1290 years, as to make them end with the same year, a. d. 1864. But in effecting this arrangement, instead of following the rotation mentioned by Daniel, he makes the 1290 years begin first, viz., by the sacking of Jerusalem in A. D. 70, and to terminate them with the Protest- ant testimony of Wickliffe, a. d. 1360. The 1260 years he makes begin about the middle of this period, a. d. 715, and ends them with a. d. 1864 ; while the 1335 years commences in a. d. 1864, and ends in a. d. 3199. Consequently his com- putations overleap the 6000th year of the- world from the creation, which ends in a. d. 1868, by 1331 years! The process by which this is ef- fected, is, by making the 1260, 1290, and 1335 years entirely separate and distinct periods, in- stead of viewing them as three divisions of one and the same period. But, unfortunately for Mr. F., by another cal- culation in reference to the 1260 years, his whole ingeniously devised theory is made to con- fute itself. In another part of his " Sacred Cal- endar of Prophecy," he considers the point of time from which the 1260 years are to be reck- oned, is the completion of the great demonola- trous apostasy of the Christian Church under the dominancy of the " little horn" of Dan. vii. 8, 20, 21, 25, by the removal out of its way " of the co- ercing power of the coercing law of the Roman empire," as that impediment which hindered the decided manifestation of " ^he man of sin," 2 Thess. ii. 1-6. This date is .^ifeterrained by the following pr&cess : The first step was, the Em- peror Constantine withdrawing himself from Eome, and constituting Byzantium the head of his empire, by which act he removed the coer- cing power of Rome, so far as it was exercised by the imperial head, thus giving the Roman bishop > Sao. Calend. of Proph., vol. i. pp. 40, 41. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 175 space for expansion. The second was, the con- firmation of these privileges and immunities by the edict of Gratian and Valentinian the Second, A. D.318. The third, another edict of Theodo- sius the Second and Valentinian the Third, a. d. 445. And finally, fourth, he conies down to the decree of Justinian in a. d. 533, constituting the Pope head of all the churches, and directing that all ecclesiastical business should be laid before him ; and then concludes : 1' Thus was the co- ercing power removed, so far as it was exercised hy the head of the empire." ' Now, how this " little horn" can be made to have begun his career at two different periods, viz, in A. D. 533 and a. d. 715 (the difi'erence be- ing 182 years), we must confess goes quite be- yond our arithmetic. We can only account for this discrepancy in the premises on the part of Mr. Faber, on the ground of the overwhelming weight of evidence now lying before us (and on which he himself relies), in proof that the " little horn" of Dan. vii. made his first appearance upon the prophetical platform in a. d. 533, and from which, as we contend, commenced the mys- tical period of the " time, times, and dividing of time," or 1260 years of Dan. vii. 25. We here refer to the edict of Justinian in a. d. 533, con- stituting John II., the then bishop of Eorhe, the supreme head over all the Churches ; and to the Pope's ratification of the imperial edict, etc. Before proceeding, however, to make such ex- tracts from these documents as the subject in hand requires, it will be well to premise, that the acts or decrees of Gratian and Valentinian II., in A. D. 378,* and those of Theodosius and Valen- tinian III., in A. D. 445," refer alone to matters of the discipline of the Church. Mr. Faber, how- ever, in his " Sacred Calendar of Prophecy," as- sumes the ground, that the letter of Justinian confers no more ample powers on the Bishop of Rome, than did theirs. But, that Mr. F. is in an error on this subject, is clear from the fact, that the edict of Justinian includes, with the others, pontifical supremacy in matters of faith. Let us now turn our attention to the em- peror's letter to John II., bishop of Rome. " Victorious Justinian, pious, fortunate, renowned, always triumphant Augustus, to John, the most holy Archbishop of the venerable city Rome, and Patriarch. " Beddentes, etc. We rendering, as has al- ways been our wish, honor to the apostolic See ' Sac. Calend. of Proph., vol. i. pp. 158-158 (Lond. ed.) ' First printed by Baroniua, Annales Eccles., anno 881, vol. iv. ool. 422; ed. fol. ftntv. 1597-1612. » Novell, tit. xxiii. ed. fol. Paris, 1607, p. 561. and to your holiness, and honoring your blessed- ness, as it becomes us to honor a father, hasten to inform your holiness of all things connected with the state of the Churches ; for it has always been our earnest desire to preserve the unity of your apostolic See, and the state of the holy Churches of God, which, up to this time has in- variably obtained, and subsists undisturbedly. " Hence we have hastened, both to bring into subjection, and to unite to the See of your holiness ALL THE PRIESTS OF THE WHOLE EASTERN TRACT. Of those things, then, which have been at present agitated (though they have been clear and indu- bitable, and have been firmly held and taught by all priests at all times), we have thought it neces- sary that your holiness should be informed. For we suflFer not any thing which is agitated connec- ted with the state of the Churches, clear and in- dubitable though it be, to go on without your holiness, also, who are the head of all the holy Churches, being apprised of it. For, by all means, as has been said, we are eager that the honor and authority of your See may increase. "We therefore, acquaint your holiness," etc. The letter concludes thus : — " We request your blessedness to pray for us, and to procure the watchful cure of God over us." The following extract is from the Pope's Rati- fication of the Imperial Edict. " To his most glorious and indulgent Son, Justinian Augus- tus, John the Bishop of the city of Some [sends greet- ing]. "Inter clangs, etc. Among the illustrious praises of your mildness, most Christian of princes, it shines like some star of purer light, that in love of the faith, that in pursuit of brotherly love, being instructed in ecclesiastical learning, you preserve THE reverence OF THE RoMAN SeE, AND ARE SUBJECTING ALL THINGS TO IT, AND BRINGING THEM TO UNION WITH IT, to whosc foundcr, that is, the first of the apostles, the charge was given with our Lord's own lips, 'Feed my sheep.' Which See, both the rules of the fathers, and the statutes of the princes show, and the much- to-be-honored expressions of your piety attest, to be truly the HEAD OF all THE Churches. It is manifest then that in you is fulfilled what the Scriptures say, 'By me kings reign, and princes decree right- eousness,' etc. , . Accordingly, I have received with my habitual reverence, the letter of your Serenity, . . . the consent of my brothers and fellow-bishops having been given to it in the interval : which edict, since it is conformable to Apostolic doctrine, I confirm with my authority." On receiving the Pope's answer, the emperor 176 OUR BIBLE CHBONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. immediately published them, along with the de- cree, and his own letter to John, inserting them under the title, "De Summa Trinitate et Fide Catbolica," in the front of the revised and au- thenticated copy of the new code of laws which he promulgated. It must be remembered, also, that the emperor's letter itself was equivalent to a law, the imperial rescripts being always so re- garded and acted on. To this, however, it is objected, that the above letter of Justinian, " confers no authority whatever on the Pope," etc. . . " Nor could Justinian, had he attempted it, have conferred any authority on the Pope over the Churches of the Western empire ; as that empire was no longer under his dominion, but had passed under the jurisdiction of the Goths,'" etc. In reply, we respectfully submit, that, even granting that the above edict of Justinian did not create the papal authority here contended for, the manner in which the whole was done, is, in fact, far more fatally effec- tive, than if the emperor had formally decreed that the Pope should have such and such power ; for in that case, the power would have appeared to be merely of State origin. Let it then, we repeat, be admitted, that Justinian does not decree it as if it were of his erecting, but writes a letter in which he recognizes its existence, and sub- mits a decree for the Pope's ratification. Still, by that act, he seated his holiness beside him on the legislative throne, as a C^sar in the Church — the centre of unity, the determiner of contro- versy. On the other hand, the Pope's letter shows that he was in ecstasies at the prospect of aggrandizing his See, the act of Justinian, so far as his power extended, legally constituting him the head and centre of unity of all the apostolic Churches, both of the Eojst and of the West ! Nor is this all. The rival patriarch of Constan- tinople, on this occasion, by the dexterous man- agement of the emperor, writes, "being in haste to follow in all things the Apostolic See of his holiness," etc. What a glorious vision for the pride of the pontiff! But, his high aspirations could not be realized without establishing, at the same time, a precedent for the emperor's usurpa- tion in spiritual things. Hence, in the history of the East, it may be observed, that in after times, not the Pope, nor yet the patriarch of Con- stantinople, but the emperors are the spiritual despots. And so, while the Pope in the West plays the part of Ooesar in the Church, the em- peror in the East plays the part of Pope in the » See Lord'a ' Coining and Keig;ij of Christ," pp. 874, 875. State. As to the other part of the above objec- tion, it is sufficient to reply, that, in addition to the reduction of Carthage by Belisarius in the summer of A. d. 533, and subduing Africa in the spring following, he accomplished the recovery of Italy from the Goths, soon after. Nor is it unimportant in this connection to remark, that the more strict consolidation of the monastic or- ders in the West — subsequently so important a prop to the papacy — was achieved by Benedict of NisSa, about the same time. Monastic vows were thenceforward rendered irrevocable. (See 1 Tim. iv. 3.) We must therefore decline acceding to the affirmation, that " it is apparent that the exact date of the 1260 years is not known ; nor, conse- quently, the time of their termination." We, on the contrary, think it quite " apparent," and be- yond the point of fair controversy, that this pro- phetic number commenced running its predes- tined course with a. d. 533. Also, that the as- tounding events which marked the era of a. d. 1793, fully verify the predicted judgment which was to fall upon this little horn, at the close of that period, Dan. vii. 26 : " And the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it ukto the end." There were premonitions of the calamities which were to fall on the popedom, so far back as the year 1727, clearly traceable t6 the growing dis- affection of the ten kings towards the Pontifi- cate ; so that the Venetian ambassador said, " Something unnatural is coming to pass in the sight of all, for the Catholic governments are be- ginning to unite in hostility to the Roman court." So also in a. d. 1768, the then reigning pontiff, Benedict XIV., sought by concessions to avert the impending storm, but all in vain. The hos- tility of the alienated powers continued to in- crease, until, at last, it broke out in the National Assembly of France (its eldest son, and for ages its most devoted ally), which body, as an initia- tory step to the overthrow of the " dominion" of the beast, abolished the tithes, held by the Pope as sacred to himself and his priesthood. Next followed the confiscation of the Church lands. Soon after, the rifling and suppression of 4000 wealthy monastic houses, together with a requi- sition made on the Catholic priesthood of France to abjure all allegiance to the Pope, — the Romish religion, at the same time, being abolished by act of Assembly, — and a massacre of 4000 priests as a sort of libation to the triumphs of the phrensied zealots. These, I repeat, and a thousand other acts inflicted by those instruments of Heaven's OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 117 vengeance upon the seat of the papal power, e. g., the overturning of churches — plundering of altars — the converting of church bells into cannon- balls, and of cathedrals into powder-manufacto- ries, or livery stables, etc., etc., sufficiently dem- onstrate that the hour of its judgment had come. Finally, on this subject, we observe that " from 1789 to 1793, Napoleon's celebrated code — which made a chanare in the constitution of Europe as marked and as sweeping as that made by Justinian, 1260 years before — was promul- gated. France, which had been for 1300 years the great bulwark of the Komish Church, broke loose from its subjugation, and in that disruption shattered and shook the papal influence through- out the world. We, therefore, conclude, that the era of the French Eevolution was the end of the 1260 years, during which the witnesses were to prophecy in sackcloth.' Here, however, we must advert to the pro- phetic announcement, Dan. vii. 12, that the " lives" of the ten beasts were to be "prolonged for a season and a time" which opens the way for our introduction to the notice of the reader. First, the 1290 days, Dan. xii. 11, "and from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, to set up the abomination that maketh desolate, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days." Here it is to be recollected, that to both the little horns of Dan. vii. and viii. were assigned the work of taking away the daily sacrifice. Now the Scriptures recognize the Church of God as one body, under two dispensa- tions, Jewish and Christian. This is beautifully illustrated by St. Paul, through the medium of the allegorical olive-tree, with its natural and ingrafted branches, Rom. xi. The worship of God in both constitutes the "daily sacrifice" which he requires and accepts, if offered in faith and sincerity, according to his appointment. And, as a punishment for their abuse, perversion, or neglect, or as a trial of their faith, this " daily sacrifice" is either taken away or suspended. The former is applicable to the work of the " little horn" of Dan. viii. who, in the " vision" revealing the origin, progress, and end of the Turkish dominion, as a whole, through the pro- longed period of 2300 years, is represented as in- flicting his wrath upon the objects of it when " their transgression was come to the full," i. e., " in the latter part of their kingdom," during the running course of the '■^five months" or 150 years of Eev. ix. 5, 10, and of the "hour, the day, the 1 Eov. xi. 3. 23 month, and the year,'" or 396 years of Rev. ix. 15. It consequently took effect upon apostate Chris- tendom, and upon the Jewish nation. On the other hand, as a trial of faith and constancy of Protestant Christians, the " little horn" of Dan. vii. commenced his work, which, beginning in A. D. 633, terminated iu the "judgment" inflicted upon him, as above described, in a. d. 1793. But that judgment did not utterly destroy him. His "dominion," politically, was lost to him. Still, his " life was prolonged to him, first, for a sea- son." That " season," we shall now show, is co- incident with the 30 years which, added to the 1260, make the 1290 years under consideration. By adding 30 years to 1793, we are brought down to A. D. 1823. Was there, then, at that era, any event demonstrative of the continued vi- tality of the " little horn" during the above inter- val ? We turn for an answer to the working of that system of Jihe papacy, which, embracing a great auricular principle of secrecy, manages the whole springs and machinery of Romish priestly movements, until properly matured for public ac- tion. This, I submit, was developed by the pro- curement (through the agency of the Catholic Association into whose hands Ireland had fallen) of the British act of Parliament in the removal of political disabilities, etc., in behalf of the Cath- olics in Ireland, A. d. 1823 ; in reference to which. Lord John Russell, prime-minister of England, in a letter to the Right Rev. the Bishop of Durham, says : " My dear lord, I not only promoted to the utmost of my power the claims of the Ro- man Catholics to all civil rights, but I thought it right, and even desirable, that the ecclesiastical system of the Roman Catholics should be the means of giving instruction to the numerous Irish immigrants in London and elsewhere, who, without such help, would have been left in hea- then ignorance." Since that time, other meas- ures of favor, from the same source, have tended greatly to strengthen the hands of this revived power, and have been directed with deadly, im- placable, and unerring aim, against the Protest- ant power of England, not only, but of every nation throughout Christendom 1 That this is no empty chimera, especially in regard to England, we refer the reader to the " Apostolic Letter of His Holiness Pope Pius IX., establishing an Episcopal Hierarchy in England ;" a full reprint of which may be found in " Cum- ming's Lectures on Daniel," Appendix, pp. 445- 450, Philadelphia edition, published by Lindsay and Blakiston, 1854. That letter shows, that the present reigning pontiff, as the head of the apos- 178 OUE BIBLE CHBONOLOGT CRITICALLY EXAMINED. tasy predicted by St. Paul, 2 Thess, ii., has ac- tually taken ecclesiastical possession of England — divided it into dioceses among his bishops — and appointed Cardinal Wiseman as their head, and archbishop of Westminster. Hence the cardinal, on this occasion, in a letter to his clergy, secular and regular, says : " The gi'eat work is complete ; ■what you have long prayed for is granted : your beloved country has received a place among the fair churches which, normally constituted, form the splendid aggregate of Catholic communion; Catholic England has been restored to its orbit in the ecclesiastical firmament, from which its light had long vanished, and begins now anew its course of regularly adjusted action round the centre of unity, the source of jurisdiction, of light, and of vigor." And Father Newman, one of the seceders from the English Protestant Church, in a sermon delivered on the occasion of the enthronement of Dr. Ulla±horn as bishop of Birmingham, says : "The mystery of God's providence is now fulfilled, and though he did not recollect of any people on earth but those of Great Britain, who, having once rejected the reli- gion of God, were again restored to the bosom of the Church, God had done it for them. It was wonderful in their eyes. The holt hierarchy FiAD BEEN RESTORED. The grave was opened, and Christ was coming out" And, be it observed, though the Bishop of London, Lord Eldon, and Lord John Russell, have all raised their voices against this illegal and traitorous act of encroach- ment on the ecclesiastical constitution of Protest- ant England, as by law estabhshed ; yet nothing has been done to quell, or even to arrest or dis- turb, its progress ! And as it respects our own beloved country, who will deny that the Roman Catholics do not now hold the balance of power at the ballot-box? While, on the other hand, the system of proselytism ; their eflForts to ex- clude the Bible from our common schools ; and their unprecedented increase in all parts of the land within the last twenty years, strongly indi- cate the revival and spread of this fearful power of the " little horn," under the outspread, blood- bought banner of our stars and stripes ! Finally. To the 1290 years is also added 45 years, making a total of 1335 years. So Dan. xii. 12, 13, "Blessed is he that waiteth and Cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thy way till the end be : for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days^ A second period, this, coin- cident with the "time," superadded to the "sea- son," mentioned in Dan. vii. 12, of the revived life- of the papal power. We cannot now enter more at length into a detailed exhibit of the events which have transpired since 1823, in con- nection with the zeal of the little Roman ecclesi- astico-political horn, in the recovery of his origi- nal strength, and of the success which has crowned his eflForts in both hemispheres. This success, especially in the matter of proselytism from the various ranks of nominal Protestantism, together with his growing ascendency in the arena of political strife, as above briefly repre- sented, may well justify his vaunted confidence of once more securing a dominancy throughout Christendom, Yielding this point, therefore, — for it is in perfect accordance with our own expecta- tion and belief — yet that dominancy, in the light of that prophetic Word which has guided our pen thus far, we have the blessed assurance,- will be short-lived. This is evident from the obvious import of the passage quoted from Dan. xii. 12, 13, which, with but few exceptions, prophetical writers make to terminate before the commence- ment of the era of Millennial blessedness. The principal exception of those above alluded to, is that of Mr. Faber, who, viewing the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days as independent periods which follow each other, insists that the 1335 days end after the millennial period ; and hence, that Dan- iel is not to " stand in his lot," i. e., be raised from the dead, until the thousand years of Rev. xx. 1-6, are expired. This theory will account for his chronological arrangement of those dates, as given in pages 132, 133 of this work. On this subject, he argues thus : " Those who suppose the 1335 days to commence synchronically with St. John's 1260 days, of course believe that the termination of the 1335 days is the commencement of the millennial period of blessedness; or, in other words, that this period begins where the 1335 days end. Such an interpretation, though it has been very gener ally adopted, can scarcely be said to harmonize with the natural purport of Daniel's phraseology. The prophet does not say, 'Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the end of the 1335 days' — but he says, ' Blessed is he that cometh to the 1335 days.'" From this Mr. F. infers, that "the obvious conclusion is, that the period of blessed- ness and the 1335 days commence synchronic- ally,"^ etc. To show the fallacy of this conclusion, however, it is only necessary to remark, that though the end is not mentioned in verse twelve, yet in the following verse, which is evidently expository of ' ''lo. Caleud. of Proph., vol. i. p. 820. OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 179 it, that phrase is twice repeated : "But go thou thy way till the end be (i. e., the end of the 1335 days of the prccediug verse) : for thou shalt rest (or sleep in the dust of the grave), and stand in thy lot (i. e., in the resurrection) at TUB END OP THE (1335) DAYS." To Mr. Faber's question, " For if we were to say, Blessed is he that cometh to the thousand Apocalyptic years of Christ's reign with his saints : what should we be supposed to intimate ?" We reply : certainly, Blessed is he that cometh to the beginning of this period : because it commences with BLESSEDNESS. And for the very same reason we would say. Blessed is he that cometh to the end of the 1335 years, because this period begins with WOE. The inevitable conclusion therefore is, that if Daniel is to sleep in Jesus (which " thou shalt rest" clearly implies), and is to stand in his lot at the end of the 1335 days (i. e., have his part in the resurrection : and what can " Standing in his lot" signify but this?) and if, again, these 1335 days, commencing with a. d. 533, as we have shown, when added to the last number, will ter- minate in a. D. 1868 ; we repeat, the inevitable conclusion is, that the first resurrection takes place before the millennial blessedness commences its course. Then further, as all acknowledge, that the resurrection is dependent on the second coming of Christ, it equally follows, that that event takes place before, and in order to, the establish- ment of that blessed era. See Rev. xx. 1-C. numeeal letters as foemeelt used bt the nations of latins, greeks, and hebrews. Latin. Greek. Hebrew. SECTION VI. The subject of the Prophetical numbers concluded. We come now to consider the last of the shorter prophetical dates : The number, '■^ six hundred and sixty-six: for it is the number of a man," Rev. xiii. 18. On this subject I remark, that " it was customary with the Hebrews, Greeks, and Latins (or Romans), to use the letters of their alphabet, to keep accounts by, instead of figures, which were of much later invention ; the same ancient practice (in part) prevails to this day, according to the old Roman custom ; as you may perceive on books, medals, monuments, or public buildings ; e.g., mdcoxoiii., is put -for 1793, which in Hebrew characters is thus deciphered, asts 1793, and in Greek thus, oi/>i,7 1793. The following table will tend more fully to illu.«trate this subject. 1000 a 1 600 n 2 100 Y 8 50 S 4 10 E 5 6 5- 6 1 < 1 f 8 9 10 K 20 >. 30 J' 40 V 50 f 60 70 IT 80 M 90 P 100 200 300 400 500 600 100 800 900 1000 2000 8000 4000 6000 10,000 20,000 100,000 200,000 t« 1 a 2 a 8 1 4 n 5 n 6 t 1 n 8 t: 9 1 10 3 20 h 30 •a 40 3 60 D 60 S 70 80 90 100 200 800 400 600 600 700 800 900 1000 2000 " Now, the Holy Spirit knowing, that notwith- standing men and nations would change their customs and manners, by being overturned, yet still their numeral letters would remain in use to the latest posterity. He therefore, in infinite wis- dom, thought fit to describe the mark or name of the Popish Beast by numeral letters, that thereby it might unalterably remain, and so not only ap- pear both a mark and a name, but a numeral name, or a name distinguished by the coincidence of its numbers, viz., 666 ; which number, being pointed out by a most remarkable circumstance (and of which we shall speak presently), happen- ing iu the corresponding century, it could not be possibly mistaken, forgotten, altered, or lost. " On these accounts (among others), no doubt the Holy Ghost gave the true sign or mark of the monster, in oypherical characters, as constitute the number 666, by a singular combination of the three above-named languages. Nor is it a little astonishing that this same number, with- out a unit over or under, should be found in the composition of the name, which has in it a com- bination of all those languages in which the (pagan) beast wrote the inscription over our blessed Lord's head on the Cross, viz., 'Latin, Greek, and Hebrew.' ' " If, then, we apply this number to the name and character of the papal beast *as a man, a Roman, of the Latin nation,' it will be found exactly to make out the mark of his name thus : 1253S)a.i"li Romanus, Xareivog, Latinus ; both which, when received as letters, may be called the mark of his name ; but when considered as numerals or figures (of which both words en- tirely consist), may then be called the number of '- Luke xxiii. 88. 180 OUR BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. his name, or the number of a man, being a Latin name derived from that of Romulus, a man, who founded Rome, pagan, and so peculiar to a man, viz., the POPE, who is the foundation of Rome •papal. " Now observe. The Hebrew and Greek letters composing the words riiiai"i. -Romiith, — MStiili Romanus, — or Xareivog, Latinus, each of them mating in numerals exactly 666,— plainly point out not only his name and the number of his name, but also the mark of his name ; e. g., in 400. 10. 10. 40. 6. 200. Romiith. 666. So likewise IB "1 5 S Kl 1 300. 6. 60. 70. 40. 200. Bomanus. 666. And also the Greek, Xaretvoa 30. 1. 300. 5. 10. 50. 70. 200. Laiinus. 666. In each of which the exact mark is contained. " It therefore evidently appears, that each name is both a mark and a number ; a mark, when viewed as made up of so many letters, therefore called the mark of his name ; a number, when viewed as made up of so many numerals, thence called the number of his name. But when con- sidered merely as a name derived from JRomiith, a Roman, or Romulus, the founder of Rome, a name common among men, it may then properly be called the number of a man ; in Scripture dia- lect, a ' man of sin^ of uncommon sin." " We proceed therefore, in this last sense, to apply this name to the ' little horn' of Dan. vii. 8, as the FRONTLET OF THE (pAPAl) BEAST. " It is to be observed as a singular circumstance, that the title, vicabivs filii dei (Vicar of the Son of God), which the Popes of Rome have assumed to themselves, and caused to be inscribed over the door of the Vatican," exactly makes the ' " I cannot leave this subject without remarking, how singular it is, that Christ should have suffered under a eon- junction of these three powers, viz., the Hebrews, Greeks, and Latins ; and that his inscription was also written in all their three languages ; further, that antichrist has also reigned in a conjunction of the same ; and as this mark is likewise contained in n combination of them, may it not therefore, according to the nature of correspondences, be expected, that the visible destruction of the man of sin, and the establishment of Christ's reign, will be manifest- ed in a conjunction of these three kindred people and tongues? So that by the same instruments that Christ has been abased, and antichrist exalted, antichrist shall be abased, and Christ alone exalted." ' "Answer to a Querist, respecting the marh of the Beast. Sib, — In answer to your observation and queries, permit me to say — the things I have asserted, are stubborn, clear facts, not mere suppositions or fancies. number of 666, when deciphered according to the numeral signification of its constituent let- ters, thus : Ticar of the Son of God. YI0AEIV8FILIIDEI. added to- 5. 1.100. 1. 6. 1. 50. 1. 1. 600. 1. gcther thus Y. 5 1 1 C 100 A.: E 1 1 Y 5 S F 1 1 L. 50 1 1 1 1 D 500 E 1 1 The number of tbe Beast 666 " It may be further observed, that not many centuries back, on \he front of the Pope's mitre, the word MYSTERY used to be inscribed, and was worn by them until the reformers discovered and pointed it out to the people, as the Scripture mark of antichrist, from Rev. xvii. 5, which glaring manifestation of ' the man of sin' so opened the eyes of the mul- titude, that the custom was immediately abolished, and the word erased from the mitre." ' The inscription in question, was actually written over the door of the Vatican at Rome, in express Latin words and characters, as inserted in this publication, viz., Vica- Eivs FiLn Dei ; and those Latin words and characters con- tain Latin numerals to the amount of 666, exactly corres- ponding with the number of the beast. With respect to the supposition you have conjured up, that the Pope might be called VicaHus CTwislMS, or Vicariws Ckrislma FUii Dei (a sortiof gibberish that is neither Latin, German, nor English), it is a matter I have nothing to do with. Mr. D. may adopt these or any other fancies to amuse himself, and to screen the head of his holiness ; but when he has done all, this question will stiU.. remain to be answered: Have those inscriptions ever appeared over the door of the Vatican at Rome ? As to Mr. D's. attempting to obscure the number of the beast 666, contained in the numerals of the words Vi- cabivs FiLii Dei, by objecting to a V; however the Pope or his emissaries may be obliged to him for his kind exer- tions on their behalf, yet I presume neither of them will condescend to appear his humble fool in Latin, for the sake of sheltering themselves under his ignorance of the Latin alphabet and of ancient inscriptions. Let Mr. D. but put his hand into his pocket, and exam- ine a common halfpenny, he will then see, that a whole nation have unanimously adopted that practice which Mr. D's. wisdom cannot discover the propriety of, viz., retain- ing the use of the ancient Latin V in preference to the U, as he will find by the inscription, viz., Geokoivs, not Geob Gins." ' Fleming's Key to the Apocal., Appendix, pp. 105-108. OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 181 " Even those who are unacquainted with the languages may, by comparing the characters and numbers (as given in the preceding table), satisfy themselves of the truth of the foregoing assertions." Further. It is a matter of historic verity, that "in A. D. 666, Piipe Vitalian first ordained that public worship should be performed in the Latin language, and popery really became the Latin Church." As, therefore, the number of the papal beast is found in the name Latinus (and with which corresponds the Hebrew Somiith, and the Greek Xarsivog), it can apply to no other than to the western, or Romish Church, whose subjects " are universally called Latins ; and it is true, as an able commentator ' has expressed it, they latin- ize every thing ; masses, prayers, hymns, litanies, canons, bulls, in short, every thing is in Latin ; the papal councils speak Latin, nor is Scripture itself read in any other language under popery than Latin. The Council of Trent commanded the vulgar Latin to be the only authentic version ; nor do their doctors doubt to prefer it to the Hebrew and Greek text, in which it was written by the prophets and apostles ; and, moreover, the Pope has communicated this language unto the people as the mark and character of the empire^ Hence, another designation applied to this power, on the principle of the interchangeable use of the terms king and kingdom, as denoting the same thing, viz., that of " The Latin King- dom." Dr. Adam Clarke, in his commentary on Kev. xiii. 1, in connection with verse 18, having shown by quotations from the acts of Romish councils. Papal bulls, etc., that they apply to the Hierarchy of Rome the above name, says: if this application of this name to that power " be correct, the Greek words signifying The Latin Kingdom, must have this number." He then adds, that "the most concise method of expressing this name among the Greeks was as follows: H AariVT] Baaikna, which is thus numbered — H = A = n B Total, 8 80 1 = 800 = 10 = 50 = 8 J = 2 = 1 = 200 = 10 = 80 = 5 = 10 = 1 666 1- 1^ !> W !z| o " No other kingdom on earth," says this learned divine, "can be found to contain 666. This is then fj ao(j)ia, the wisdom or demonstration: a beast is the symbol of a kingdom. The beast has been proved to be the Latin kingdom ; and H Aarivf] BaaiXeta being shown to contain, exclu- sively, the number 666, is the demonstration." Finally, respecting this number, we remark, that while its numeral letters, which indicate the name of the beast, are designed to "show his character, or the copy of his countenance ;" the direction given Rev. xiii. 18, to "count his num- ber," points us to the period as above, viz., A. d. 666, when he should assume this particular fea- ture of his antichristian cateer. Our conclusion is, that this number, as some contend, cannot have a common commencement with the 1260 years of Daniel and St. John; nor as others, because this particular form of the papal anti- christ took its rise in the sixth century, that it is to continue to run a career of three times six, or eighteen centuries. Either of these conjectures introduce so much confusion in the department of prophetic chronology, as to carry to every intelligent mind, the evidence of their own refu- tation. In regard to the two little horns, the Papal and the Mohammedan, though, as we have seen, they bear several strong marks of resemblance in their general character and work, yet, being en- tirely separate and distinct powers, the marks which evidence the period of their rise respect- ively, show that they were not contemporaneous. This however admitted, as the "little horn" of Dan. vii. 8, was preceded by its preparatory ele- mental workings even in the days of St. Paul ; ' so of the " little horn" of Dan. viii. 8, 9, which denoted the existence of the Mohammedan im- posture. And, as of their commencement, so of their termination. If we assign to both these powers, in accordance with the end of the period allotted to their prevalence respectively, a certified point of time, we are not to imagine a total anni- hilation of their peculiar elements. For, as the antichristian elements of the papal power, pre- ceded by some centuries its existence in an em- bodied and tangible form ; so, upon the termina- tion of the period assigned to its existence in that form (like "the beasts" in Dan. vii. 12, which, while "they had their dominion taken away," "their lives were prolonged for a season and a time"), it may still exist in the union of its ele- ments with others, in the establishment of. the « Dr. H. Mooro. Consult also 2 Cor. xiii. xiv. 1 2 Thesa. ii. 17. 182 OUE BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CEITICALLY EXAMINED. last antichristian confederacy, which, according to the apostle Paul, is immediately to precede the second advent.' And, what is true of the Papal, is true also of the Mohammedan power. Indeed, of this last power, its final extinction, as one of the severest persecuting agencies in the hand of Satan against the Church, is fixed in prophecy to the close of the present dispensation. See Eev. xvi. 12. We now proceed to furnish a summary of the shorter prophetical numbers, taken in connection with the historic chronology of Scripture at the point of their commencement, as set forth in this work. A. H. I. 1. Set down for commencement of the 2300 years, 8652 2. Add years, B. u 480 8. " A.B 1820 4 Add years for gradaal exhaustion of the mysti- cal Euphrates from that date t» a. d. 1859.. . 89 6. Add 9years to A. ». 1868 9 2848 Total 6000 II. 1. Set down for commencement of 2800 years 8652 2. Add years of the 2300, down to commencement of its first integral period of **Jive months," or 150 years, Eev. ix. 5 1572 8. Add the 150 years above 150 4. Add for interval of Turkish repose, from A. d. 934 to A. D. 1057 123 5. Add interval between departure of Turks from Bagdad, A. D. 1057, to capture of Constanti- nople, A. D. 1463=896 years, coincident with the second integral period of " a day, an hour, a month, and a year," Eev. Ix. 14, 15 396 6. 'Add for drying up of mystical Euphrates, Eev. xvL12 107 2348 Total 6000 We have at length reached the end proposed in this volume — that of furnishing the evidence, on the basis of the corrected Hebrew version of Holy Scripture, that the current year a. d. 1859, is the year a. m. 5991 ; and that hence, the year a. d. 1868, completes the 6000th year of the world's history, from the creation and fall of man. The writer would now, therefore, most respect- fully, but with the earnestness which the nature and importance of the result, if founded in truth, would seem to justify, call upon all classes, — the clergy and the laity, the learned and the un- learned, the rich and the poor, together with those who govern and those who are governed, — to pon- der well the facts and arguments herein adduced in its support. Referring the reader to the three propositions laid down in page 12 of this work, the writer would appeal, whether, in encountering the difficulties that have heretofore surrounded this most intricate and long litigated subject, he I 2 Thoss. ii. 8-9. has sustained said three propositions, by placing beyond the reach of all legitimate controversy, the following points : 1. That of successfully vindicating the Hebrew version of Scripture as alone authoritative in de- termining the true chronology of the world, against the various theories of septuagintarians, on the one hand, and the pre- Adamite or ethnologi- cal systems of modern Egyptologists, on the other. 2. That he has proved, on the authority of Holy Scripture, that God, from the beginning, has limited the period for the accomplishment of all his ordinary purposes in nature, providence, and grace, to precisely 6000 years from the creation and fall of man ; and, 3. That he has demonstrated, that the two chronological chains of Holy Scripture, the his- toric and the prophetic combined, neither fall short of, nor overleap, but exactly fill up, that period of 6000 years to a fraction. If these several points have been sustained, then he would appeal to all to reflect, that in NINE years from the current year of our Lord 1859, the present Christian dispensation, as forming the larger portion of the period called " the times of the Gentiles," ■will have closed upon the Church AND THE WORLD FOREVER. What then 1 In reply, let it at present suffice that we say — not the end of time, for only six days of the great antitypal week will have passed away. The seventh must ensue. Not the destruc- tion of our earth or world (/coff/iof ) by a universal conflagration : so far from this, it is to be " the time of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets, since the world began." In a word, the year A. M. 6001, will be the ushering in of the great Millennial Sabbasism, spoken of in Rev. xx. 1-6. This period of blessedness, however, will be pre- ceded by that season oi unparalleled " tribulation," predicted by our Lord, "such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be :" ' " the days ol vengeance'' (against the apostate Church and the ungodly infidel world), " that all things that are written may be fulfilled.'" But this season, called "the time of Jacob's trouble," thank Heaven, will be short. It is that unchronological period of which we have spoken ; but its utmost limit will be bounded by the then existing "generation," which, says the Great Prophet, Christ, " shall not pass away, till all" the unfulfilled events of prophecy appertaining to 1 Mark xiii. 19. " Luke xxi. 22. OUK BIBLE CHRONOLOGY CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 183 it " be fulfilled." ' Yea, more. We are assured that those days of "affliction," of "vengeance," "shall be shortened for the elect's sake, whom God hath chosen :" else " no flesh should be saved." ^ It does not, however, belong to the subject of this volume, to enter into detail in regard to the events which fall within this brief space. This 1 Matt. xxiv. 84 ; Mark xiii, 30 ; Luke xxi. 9 Mark xiii. 20. will require a sequel to the present treatise, which, if Providence permit, will be forthcoming in due time. And now, in taking leave of the reader of "our Bible Chronology," we would " commend him to God, and to the word of His grace, which is able to build him up, and to give him an inheritance among them that are sanctified," ' in that " world TO ooME," and nigh at hand, " whereof we speak." ' > Acts XX. i " Hob. ii. 5. TABLES, CHRONOLOGICAL AND GENEALOGICAL. SACKED CHRONOLOGY. From the CREATION, A. M. 1, PERIOD I. ANTEDILUVIAN AGE. Embraces 1656 years. TO TUB DELU&E, A. M. 1656. A.M. NAMES AND ETENTS. CKBATION. ADAM , 130SETII ZSSJENOa 825 CAINAN 895 MAHALALEEL . 460JAEED , 622 ENOCH. 6S7 874 1066 1666 METHUSELAH . LAMECH NOAH The Deluge, Trs. Kefebbnoes. b. 0. Gen. 1 : 2. ■ 5:3. "12. "15. "18. "25. "2a 8: 13,14. 4132 4002 3397 SS07 3787 S672 3610 3446 3258 3076 2476 SYNCHRONICAL Feom the DELTJOE, A. M. 1656, PERIOD II. NOAHIC AGE. Embraces 427 years. TO THE VOOATIOir, A. M. 2063. 1658 8HEM ARPHAXAD . SALAH . CANAANITES. (JK,fe]9.) 80 Gen. 11 : 10. " — 12. 14 2474 2489 2409 ANCIENT EGYPT. A.M. 1666 •'The land of HAM," Ps. 106: 28, 27; 78:51; 106:22. MIZEAIM (ife- nee), its Founder. Gen. 10: 6.— {Note 4.) NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. 204 B.C. 2476 1723 1757 1787 EBEE, from wliom the HEBREWS deriTe their name, (Jfote 1.) PELEG(iK)te2) REIT 1819 1849 SERUG.. NAHOK . SO 16. Gen. 11 : 18. " — 20. 2376 2845 2313 EGYPTLAMT DYITASTIES, From A. M. 1860, B. C. 2272, to the congiiett of Egypt by the Romans, B. O. m.—{,Not» 6.) XTL- 2254 -DYNASTY OF FIVE THE. BAN KINGS. 1878 TEEAH {Note 5) . 205 ■ > Names nnknown. 140 2272 Terah lived 205 years, and died in Haran, Gen. 11 : : after which ABRAHAM, his youngest son, being 75 years of ago, leaves Haran to go to Canaam,, Gen. 12 : 4, in obedience to what Gox> had said unto him while yet in UR of tlie Chaldees, Gm. 12: 1—" Get thee out of thy country," etc CANAANITES. 2000 2044 AIAN. OSOETASKN I (Note 17.) AMENEMHE 1. Timais. ConclMris. XVII.— DYNASTY of the HYK- SHOS, or 6 Shepherd Kings in Low- er Eeypt cotemporary with that of 6 TUEBAN Kings in Upper Egypt Salatis, 19 B. Anon ? 44 Apachnas, 86.7 Apophis, 61 Janias, 50.1 Aseth, 49.2 Total, 259.10 ABSAHAM called. Compare Gen. 11:3 with 12: 4, & Acts 7: 4. 2050 AMENEMHE II,, OSOETASEN It., Do. III., 14 AMEN'MHEIIL, 44 ^Sol vocatua iti jwitice,'" AilMEN, or Thothmosis, Misphagu 260 2 2049 FSOU THE VOCATION, A. M. 2083, PERIOD III. ABRAHAMIC AGE. Embraces 430 years. TO THE EZODE, A M. 2613. 2'i98 2094 2107 21118 SOJOCEN and BONDAGE of the ISUAELITE8 in EGYPT, 430 yenra, as follows: HAGAR, wife to Abraham ISHM AEL— Born Circumcision Instituted ISAAC-Born •| Exod. 12:41 Gen. 16 : 3. " —16. " 17:24. " 21 ; 5. XVIIL-DYNASTT of 17 THEBAN Kings. By the expulsion of tlie Shepherd Kings, this Dynasty sub- sequently attained the most brilliant and interesting position known in PHAEONIC history. It was du- ring this period that transpired tlie SOJOURN and BONDAGE of the ISRAELITES, and their EXODE under MOSES, in the reign of KAM- 8E3I. 2089 202S 20 4 TABLES OF ANCIENT HISTOEY-SACRED AW PROFANE. PROFANE OHHONOLOGY. BABTLON. ASSYMA. MKDES. PEKSIANS. GREECE. SOME. A.M. NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. B.C. A.M. NAMES & EVENTS. Trs. B.C. (NoU 20.) (ITote 21.) Note 22. 1656 30 2476 lO.W fiO 2476 petty pi evolt fro monarc 0. 702. h. by ieir r r one 0; B 11-p 1686 NIMBOD, its Fonnder. Babylon, 120 2446 its capiul. 6m. 10 : 8, 10 — (.Ifote 8.) son of es, gc bsolut unite ing, A noe'ASHUE. its Founder. 2426 IH^"^ Nimrod was the first who intro- Oem. 10: 22. Nine- duced the Zabian Idolatry, or veh, its capital. Gen. worship of the heavenly bodies. 10:11,12. |li|.S After about 120 years, A. M. 1806, BELUS L jIsIb Babylon was included in Assy- NINUS, son of Belus, <%%ll ria^ and formed one vast Em- reigned 52 years. ■<.§ 1SU6 After Nimrod^s death, he was deified by his subjects, and supposed to be translated to the constellation. 194 1«26 S2^-»is OH ?nnn 9? 9139, [For an account of MESOPOTAMIA, or BTEIA, see Note 18.] vriters of eminence suppose that the t of OHEDOELAOMEE as the of the AssyHo-Babyloniy Paris TEOT taken by the Greeks The HeraclidsB return to the Pelo- ponnesus. 31699 21591 47 1559 1462 1482 1804 1290 81210 !1208 188 SYNCHRONICAL TABLES SACRED OHRONOLOQY. ANCIENT EGYPT. A.M NAMES AND ETENTB. Trs. Refeebnces B.o A.M NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs B.C. 2929 2935 2945 2958 IBZAN 6 7 10 8 J'd. 12: 8-10 " —11,12 " —13,14. 1204 1197 1187 1179 284J 17£ 1287 ELON ABDON 299S 3017 40 24 " 13: 1. 1139 1116 3023 3040 8095 26 46 4 1109 1083 1037 of Eli and Sampson.— JTofe l&l SiMUEL. As Judge. Conjectural.- (JVofo 14) XXL— DYNASTY OF 7 TA NITE KINGS. MANDUPTEP. Smerdis.... AA8EN ? Psusennis I 8057 SAUL 40 1 Sam. 10:1. Acta 18 : 21. 1076 3097 8100 DAVID. He becomes King of all Isra David subdues the Jebusites, and the el 40 2S'm.6:4,6. 1085 3099 8108 Amenophthie 9 6 1088 1024 fortress of Jebus in Jerusalem is taken. 1 Ckr, 10, 11. SOLOMON 8 1 Kings 5:1, 6:1*11:42. 1032 feomthe, ( PERIOD v. ) ™''™ FoTTETH Teae OP J [SABTLOmSS CAP- SOLOMON; "\ REGAL AGE. /" tjyitt. A. M. 8100, ^ Embraces 430 years. j A. M. 8580. DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM. KJNQS OP JUDAH cotemporarywltll tlic KINGS OF ISRAEEi. A.M JUDAH. Trs B. 0. A.M ISRAEL. Trs. B.C. 8100 SOLOMON. 1 Kings 5 : 1, 6: 1, and 11: 12. 37 1032 3114 3123 9 19 1018 1009 Psiuennes IL— (Note 16.) XXII.— DYNASTY OF 9 BU- BASITE KINGS. SHESHONK. Shishaek,Secon- ehes. [N. 5. —This king inva- ded Jerusalem in the 5th year of EEHOBOAM. 1 Kings 14: 26,26.] OSOEKON 1. Osoroth. Osor- thon. SHESHONK II 3137 REHOBOAM. 1X12; 16-20 17 993 3187 JEEOBOAM L 1X14:20. 22 995 8142 3168 21 16 "29 990 969 ■954 3154 8157 ABU AH. 1X15:2. (IStli year of Jerob. 1X15:2.) ASA. 1X16:10 8 41 978 975 8159 8161 [Asa. n.) NAD AB. 1 X 15 : 25. (2d y. of BAASHA 1X15:6. (26th year of Asa. lb. 5 : 8. 2 24 973 971 3178 8185 3187 3193 ELAH. lXmfi'Sl6:6,8.... ZIMEL " — 15. OMBL " -23 AHAB. " —29 (38th year of Asa. lb.) 2 6 22 947 945 939 3198 JEHOSHAPHAT. 2 Kings 22 : 42. (4th year of Ahab. iS. 5:41.) 25 984 3207 OSOEKON II. 1 Dates SHESHONK IIL f unknown- reckoned at 25 years. 26 925 3215 8217 AH AZI AH. i Kmge 22 : 51. (17th year of Jehosh. 76.) JOEAM. i Kings 11: 29.... 2 14 917 916 8228 3231 8232 JOEAM, (or Jehoram). 2 X 8:16-24; 2CAr. 21:9. (5tli year of Joram. 2X8:16.) AHAZIAH. 2X8:26. (11th of Joram. lb. a 25; 9: 29. ATHALIAH. 1X11:8.... 8 1 6 909 901 900 3231 JEHU. 2X10:86. Comp. 1 X 19: 16 with 2X9: 14- 28, and «. 2, 13. 28 901 8232 TEKELLOTHL TekOMhis. 25 900 3288 JOASH. iKingsii:\, (7tli year of Jehu, lb.) 40 894 8257 3280 OSOEKON in.'") • TEKELLOTH XL V Dates un- OSOEKON IV. j known ;- reckoned at 28 years. 23 40 875 852 3269 JEHOAHAZ. 2Ki7igslS:l. (23dyearofJoa8h. lb.) JEHOASH. 2 Kings 18: 16. (37th y. of Joash. lb. v. 10.) 17 16 873 666 3276 XXIIL- DYNASTY OF 4 TANITE KINGS. PETUBASTES 8278 AMAZIAH. 2X14:2. (2d year of Jehoash. lb.) 29 854 3292 JEEOBOAM IL 2X14:23. (15th year of Amaziah. Ib^ 41 840 830T UZZIAH (or Azariah). 2X 15:2. (2M year of Jerob. IL 62 825 AMOS.— (in,te 24 ) /*. 6:1.) 3320 osoEOHo !!!.'!!!!!;!!!!!!;;; 8 812 .... 3328 3383 PSAMMU8 10 81 804 794 HOSEA— (jro«« 25) 3883 13 T99 ZET ZEOHAEIAH. 6 mos. (39th ofUiziah. 2X15:8.) 3HALLUM. Imo. 2X15: 3846 13. (.39th y. of Uzziah. lb.) MEN AHEM. 2 Kings 15 -.17. (89th year of Uzziah. lb.) 10 736 ... .... .... JOEL.— (-yoKo 26.) 8356 3358 PEKAHUH. 2X(7«.15:28. (60th year of Uzzlali. lb.) PEKAH. 2X15:27. (52d year of Uzziah. lb.) 2 20 776 774 ■ 3359 TOTHAM. 2 Einga 15 : 82. (2djearofPekah. /*.) 16 T73 OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 189 PROFANE OHRONOLOOY. ASSYRIO-BABYLOHIAN EMPIRE. 334T NAMES AND EVENTS. Tis, 786 MEDES. JONAR— (ilTote 28.) Third Assyrian Dynasty. 83« PTTL, or BELU8 II. InTsdes Is- rael In the time of Menahem. 2 £■. 15 : 19 ; 1 Ohr. 5 : 28-26. 8AEDANAPALUS I., his sup- posed son. 14 785 PERSIANS. GREECE. 2956 Division of— among themselves . LACEDEMONIAN KINGDOM commenced, by the conquest of Athena by Codrus. 3112 MEDON— let Arohon of Athens.. 8181 NAMES AND EVENTS. MEDON, King of Argos. 8172 8211 8219 8257 140 1176 16 AECHIPPTT8— 8d Arohon of Ath ens. THEE0IPPUS-4th Arch, of Ath. LTCUEGUS born MEGACLES— 5th Archon of Ath HESIOD, the Poet. HOMER , DI0GENETE3— 6th Archon of Athens. PHIDON, King of Argos CARTHAGE founded by PEEICLE3— 8th Arch, of Athens. AEIPHEON— 9th Arch, of Athens. 8812 THESPIOUS — loth Archon of Athens. MAOEDONIAN' EMPIRE be- gins. 8850 AGAMESTOE— nth Areh. of Ath, JLSCHYLUS— 13th Arch, of Ath. 1036 19 41 1020 14 ROME. 6 875 17 16 852 806 784 190 SYNCHKONICAL TABLES SACRED OHKONOLOQY. ANCIENT JUDAH. ISRAEL. EGYPT. A.JI. NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. B.C. A.M. NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. B.C. A.M. NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs B.C. 3859 16 T78 335S 20 774 .3333 81 794 XXIV.— DYNASTY OF 1 SAITIO KING. fW69 BONCHORIS. Seechorie..... 44 768 8876 AHAZ. 2mngfil6:2. mth year of Pekah. 76. v. 1. 16 757 8878 HOSHEA. 2 Kings 17: 1. (12th year of Ahaz.) lb. 9 754 MICAH.-(ift)fe 28.) 83S7 The TEN TRIBES carried captive into ASSYRIA by Bhalmaneser. 2 Kings 17 : 4-6. 3391 Yi-a. Beferenoes. 741 HEZEKIAH. 2 Kings 18: 2. (Sd year of Hoshea.) 29 XXV.— DYNASTY OP 3 ETHIOPIAN KINGS. SHABAK. Sabbacon, Sabaco. 3413 12 719 3420 MANASSEH RR 2 Kings 21 : 1 712 HOSBA, 100 years before the event, predicted the Captivity of JU- Ahaz, A. M. 8377, noted the time — 65 years — when it Ghould talce place. (/«a. 7: 8.) It was fulfilled in the 22d year of MANASSEH nnder ESAEHADDAN (Asnapper, Ezra i: 2, 10). Bat Manasseh, by re- pentance was restored (2 Clir. 33 : 10-13) ; while the NATION, not - repenting of their idolatry, etc., was punished for the sins which he instigated (2Kinga2\.) His Captivity, therefore, was the PRELUDE to the prolonged "SEVEN TIMES," or 2520 years' chastisement pre- with the less of their national independence, "from the days of the kings of ASSYRIA unto this day. (Neh. 9: 82.) Hence the above 3425 SHABATOK. Smeohms. Se- ilion. Sua. 12 707 8487 TAR AKA8. Tarhaka 20 695 ' 8457 ■■"t "675 commenced a. m. 3480; b. o. 652. 6000 (Jjuke 21 : 24), must have XXVI.-DTNASTT OP 9 SAITIC KINGS. 3464 Nert^sus 6 663 3470 8478 8 45 662 654 3476 3477 AMON. 2 81 2Kinas21: 19. 657 665 PSAMMETIK I Psammeti- cus. J08I AH « 22: 1 JEREMIAH.— (Jfo(« 80.) HABAKKUK.— (JVote 81.) OBADIAH.— (JTofe 83.) JEHOAHAZ. 8 months. 2Ki7igs2S: 81 850S 8619 JEHOIAKIM 11 » _ 86. 624 JEHOIACHIN. 8 months 2 Kings2i: 8. ZEDEEIAH " " —18 613 ZEPHANIAH.— (JVoie 82.) 3528 .... NEKO IL Nedkoa. 6 609 8529 PSAMMETIK II. Psammu- IMS. Fsanmus. 15 608 BABiLONISH OAPTiviTY. Commenoe's with the IStii year of the OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 191 PROFANE OHRONOLOOY. ASSYBIO-BABYLONIAN EMPIRE. Under the reign of SARDANAFALTTS I. a conspiracy took place. \>y which th<5 vast Empire became divided into the three following Kingdoms, viz. : NINEVEH, called also ASSYRIA, BABYLON, and the KINQDOM of the MEDES and PERSIANS. NINEVEH, OR ASSTEIA. S347 S:JG1 83S; 8397 NAMES AND EVENTS. TIGLATH-PI LESEB. Invades Israel. ICft. 5:6, 26; 2.K: 15: 29; 16 : 7. Also dis- tresses Ahaz, King of Judah. 2 Oh. 28: 20. SnALMANE- SER. Invades Israel, and carries captive the Ten Tribes. 2 Kings IT: 8-6. SENNACHERIB. Inva7b«« 29.) 3470 NEBtJCHODO NOSOE. 8461 8522,SEEAB, or Sards- napalus IL 745 T05 662 610 BABYLON. 16S6 NABONASSAB 8401 3406 NADIUS CHICZIEUS... JtTG^US 3439 8440 3444 3452 3507 3517 NAMES AND EVENTS. MEBODACH- BALADAN. (See Isa. 39: 1.) BABYLONIANS and MEDES re- volt from ASSY EIA. APEONADIUS.. BEGIBELUS . . , MISOESSIMOB. DAK. Interregnum ASAEADIN, or ESAEflADDAN, of A.'^yrift. SOASDUCHIN.. NABOPOLAS- SAE. LABYNETUS .. NEBUCHAD- NBZZAB. 3U 721 647 ICEDES, FEBSIANS, NAMES & EVENTS. 8525 DAJO- CES, or Artes, the first king of the Medes. PHEA- OETES. Formerly subjected to the As- syr'n yoke by Ninus IIL OYAXA- EESI. 709 702 607 GREECE. A.M. 8860 8866 EEAofthe First Olym- piad. 3487 3502 NAMES &, EVENTS. DECEN- NIAL AE- CHONS begin. The first ANNUAL AECHON begins at Athens. BYZANTI- UM built PEEIAN- DEE, tyrant of Corinth. 7S2 706 630 BOME. 8379 8409 TATIAS, K. of Borne. NAMES & i „ EVEI^TS. [S "•"• EOME founded. 30 TULLIUS 82 HOSTILI US, King of Eome. ANCU8 MAETIUS K. of Eome. TAEQUIN- 34 lUS PEIS- CUS, K. of Eome. 758 723 672 640 610 192 STNCHBONICAL TABLES FROM THIS PERIOD, THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH, AND OF THE RISE, PROGRESS, OF DIVINELY-INSPIRED, PROPHETICO- SAORED CHRONOLOOY. JUDAH. From the BABYLOmSn CAP- TIVITY, A. M, 8580, PERIOD VI. Babylonish. Captivity, I TIMS OF EZRA, Eeatoration, etc. / Embraces 149 years. 1 ^^ ^''™- A.M, 8619 3580 BABYLONISH CAPTIVITY . DANIEL.— (Jl^ote 34.) EZEKIEL.— (JVbto 85.) NAMES AND EVENTS. 3600 EE8T0EATI0N of the Jews ft-om the BABYLONISH CAPTIVITY, by CY- EUS, King of Persia. nAGQAI.— (iiro«« 86.) 860T AHASUEEUS. (Oambyaea.) . 8610 AETAXEEXES Yrs. EEFEEENOES. Jeremiah 25 : 11. Ezok. 24 : 2. . 2 Chronicles 86 : 22, 28 ; Ezra 1 : 1-6: 2— 3—. Isaiah 44: ^" 45:1,18. Ezra 4: 6. Ezra 4: 7., B. c, 618 602 ANCIENT EGYPT. NEBUOHADNEZZAR, HAVING SUB PUT AN END ALSO TO THE VEH, AND ANNEXED IT TO PEOPHEIIC END of the PROPHETIC BABYLONIAN MEDIAN Monarch (Dan. 6 : 80, 81), and CYRUS, KING of PERSIA, who, by the SECOND PROPHETIC, or ME DO- EGYPT. XXVII.— DYNASTY OF 8 PEESIAN KINGS. S607KAMBETH. Camlyses (AlMS- uerm), Wara 4:6; Dan. 9 ; 1, 8610 AETK8HEEESHA (AV 4:7).. NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs. B. c. 626 B22 8616DAEIU8. (Hi/siaspes.) . 86 Ezra4:28, 24; Dan. 9:1 51T 8615 IZECHAEIAH.— (iiTois 87.) NTAIEUSH. Dariw. {Uys- 865rXEEXES 21 481 8672 AETAXEEXES L0NGIMANU8 7 Nehemiah B : 14 460 8651 8672 Fkom the 7Tn teae op ART. LON0IMANUS, - A. M. 8672, PERIOD VII. Ezra.— Calling of the Gentiles. Embraces 490 years. TO THE CONVERSIOIT OF CORNELIUS, A D. 87. K8HEEESHAA. Xerxes . AETKSHEEESHA. AHa- tserwes Longimanua. The Sacred Chronology is here orntinued by the SEVENTY PEOPIIETIC WEEKS, or 490 years of DANIEL (Dan. 9 : 24^27). They commence with the commission of EZRA, in the 7th year of Artnxerxes Longlmanus, and end with the Conversion of COBNELTUS {Acta 10), A. M. 4169, A. D. 87. They are divided into three parts, viz. : I. Seven Weeks, or 49 years; II. Sixty-two Weeks, or 484 years; III. Ono Week, or 7 years. OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 193 AND DESTINY OF ALL NATIONS, IS SET FORTH IN HOLY SCRIPTURE, BY A SERIES SYMBOLIC visions-Daniel ii, iv., vii.-xii. PROFANE CHRONOLOQY. NISEVEH. BABYLON. MESES. Persians DUBD EGYPT (iKlngs 24 : T), KINGDOM OF WINB- HIS VAST EMPIRE. BABYLONIAN EMPIEE. 8517 8580 NAMES&EVENTS.I2 NEBUCHADNEZ- ZAE as sole monarch. 3564 8569 S5S0 EVIIrMERODACH. Keleasos Jeboiacbin from prison, etc 2 Kings 'ii-.n-ia. BELSIIAZZAR, or NerigltWisar. MABONADiaS, Viceroy. BABYLON taken by CYAXAKES XL 56S A.M. NAMES 8525 ASTY- AGES. 48 600 8560 OYAX- ARES XL - B.C. T 607 3502 GBEECE. EMPIRE, under DAHIUS, or OYAXARES XL, the its subsequent total subversion by his nephew, UNION of MEDIA and PERSIA, establishes the PERSIAN EMPIRE. \ MEDO-FEBSIAN EMFIBE, A.X. 86011 86(l7,CAMBYSE8 .... 86I0JAETAXEEXES.. NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs. CYRUS, sole Monarch of the Medo- Peraian Empire. ENDS the Captivity of the .Tews in Babylon, in his 1st year. (2 Chr. 36: .2-2,23, Xz. .^_=_ ' • ^"^'^ Dan. 7 : 5. DARIUS HYSTASPES. (Ez. 4: 23, 24 ; Dan. 9 : 1.) 8651 8672 XERXES X ARXAXERXE8 L0NGIMANU8. B.C. 532 NAMES & EVENTS. Yrs. DRACO, Lawgiver of Athens. SOLON, Lawgiver of AtbODB. HIPPIUS and HIP. PAECHUS at Ath ens. 600 A.M. 8522 .8556 137 619 HOME. NAMES & EVENTS. Yrs. B. c. SEEVIU8 TULLIUS, King of Rome. TAEQUINIU8 SUPER- BUS, King of Rome. 3641 84 610 25 CONSULAR GOVERN- MENT set np in Eome. First DXCTAT0E8HIP introduced into Rome. C0EI0LANU8 banished. 5T6 534 609 608 491 194 SYNCHRONICAL TABLES SACRED OHRONOLOQY. JTTDAH, 3672 8G79 8T25 8728 8765 3797 8817 8S47 NAMES AND EVENTS. FIRST DIVISIOBT. EZRA.— (JK)«« 16.) NEHEMIAH. Do. Do. First commission Second commission . l^eturns to Porsin . . . . Do. Third commission . . MALACHI.— (iS^ofe 3S.) SECOIirD DIVISION. niaa-PitiEsruooD. 1.— JOIADA a.— JOHANAN (Jonatbauj . 8.— JADDUA. 4— ONIAS 1.. 5.— SIMON, the Just . 6.— ELEAZEU. 37 82 Nehcm. 12:11. Prid. Con ii. 265-290. Nehem. 12:11. il 290-350. EEFEKENCES. Ezra 7:2. Nehemlah 2 : 1-6 ; 5 : 6, etc. Do. 5: 14; 2: 6 Do. 18:6,7 Nehem. 12: 10. ii. 205-265. Pfid. Con. Prid. Con. Prid. Con. ii. 860-895. Prid. Con. ii. 895-411 . Prill. Con ii. 411 . 307 ANCIENT EGYPT, 3072 DAr.[U8 NOTHUS . 8787 3748 8756 3757 8758 •5776 8778 8796 NAMES AND EVENTS. Xerxes II. Sogdi^nus. 2 months. 7 months. XXVIII.-DTNASTT OF 1 SAITIC KING. IIOR-NASHT-nBAI. Amyr XXIX.— DYNASTY OF 5 MENDESIAN KINGS. NOPHROPHTH. Neplieritea. IIAKOE. Aohoris PSIMAUT. PemrirrmthU NAIPNUI ? Anapherltee . . . M'twiis XXX— DYNASTY OF 3 SEBENNITIC KINGS. NASHTANEBE. Neatmiebo I . T!ieo6 Tachos .ITectanebo II. , XXXI.-DYNASTY. Doubtful Yrs. 19 18 460 401 895 874 OOMMBNCEMBNT OP THE THIRD THE G-EEAT— 3800EGYPT conquered ly Al6x^r,\ and added to his dominions. I 2 332, 315 294 235 The HE-GOAT (GREOIA), from the west END OF THE PROPHETIO MEDO- DARICTS OODOMANUS, WHEN IT 8324 ALEXANDER.— Enters Hyr- cania, and conquers all the na* tions S. of the Oxas. Goes to Babylon, and dies in a drunk- en debauch. Alex.''e Family, after his deaths. PHILIP AEID^HS, brother.^ ALEXANDER, son of ... . „ . . Tim GR.SlCO-MACEDONIAlf EMPIRE divided. 827 808 After tlie extinction of Alexander's Cleopatra his sister, and Hercules dominions were divided among 33 seized upon the whole. IiVSIMA- CASSAIfDEB, Macedonia and PTOLEMY had for his share Ly- while SEIiEtrcUS, besides add- chus, possessed Syria. EGYPT. PTOLEMAIC KINGS OF EGYPT, whose names are found inscribed in Hieroglyphics on Egyptian monuments. PTOL. LAGUS. SonofLflgus- 20 806 Snter. SSliEmOKMaviUe. 8846 PTOL. PHILADELPHUS. his 83 266 nchus. AESmOE. of Lysim E will. of. OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 195 PROFANE OHRONOLOOY. IIESO-FEBSIAN EMFIBE, NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. XEEXE8 II. 2 months. BOQDIANUS. T months. 8T12DAEIUS N0THU3 . 8781 AETAXEEXE3. Mnemon. 8188 OCHUS . 8T56 DARIUS CODOMAN0S. The last Me- do-Fersian monarch. 19 28 46 460 876 PKOPHBTIO KINGDOM, UNDER ALBXANDBK 3HE0IAN EMPIRE.^ Alexander also foHnds ALEXANDRIA, takes TYRE, and invades .lUDEA, etc. He visits Jerusalem. The TWO-HOKNED RAM (MEDO-PEBSIA). FEBSIAN EMPIRE, BY THE DEFEAT OF IS SUCCEEDED BY THAT OF GRBEOE. GKEECE. 3750 8770 8792 8300 Daniel 7 ; 6. NAMES & EVENTS. Trs. HAEMODIUS & AR- ISTOGITON at Ath ALEXANDER— Born, ALEXANDER — after the death of PHILIP. 8805 8S12 8324 PHILIP ARID.^US. ALEXANDER The EMPIRE of Alex- ander divided into 4 KINGDOMS. Dan. 8:8-8. 187 840 A.M. 8641 8651 8689 880 827 808 ROME. First DECEMVIRS at E. First CENSORS at Rome. NAMES & EVENTS. Trs. 40 187 Family, by the murder of Barsine his mother, ■ his son, by order of Cassander, his extensive of his chief officers, 4 of -whom, however, soon CHXTS took for his share Bithynia and Thrace ; Greece (these were soon added to the former) ; bia, Arabia, Palestine or Judea, and Egypt; ing to his dominions the Kingdom of Lysima- SYBIA. 8852 ANTIOCnUS I. Soter 19 B.C. 491 451 443 196 STNCHRONICAL TABLES SACRED OHKONOLOQY. ANCIENT JUDAH. EGYPT. A.M. NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs. EEFEEENCES. B. C. A.M. NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs. B.C. 8847 8868 7.— MANASSEH 16 26 Q W g i ■< m Prid. Con., vol. iii. llS-225. 286 269 3346 88 286 8SS4 PTOL. EVEE6ETES I BERENICE of Cyrene. 25 248 38S9 8.— ONIAS II 83 Do. 118-164. 243 8909 PTOL. PHILOPATEE ARSINOE, his sister. PTOL EPIPHANES 17 228 3922 9.— SIMON II 22 Do. 154r-183 210 S92G 24 206 CLEOPATRA of Syria. 8944 8971 3977 10.— ONIAS III. 1 JA8AN V "27 (188-215 Do i 215-220 188 MANELAU8. i PUmCES OF JUDAH. 1.— JUDAS MACCABEUS ( 220-299 8960 PTOL. PHILOMETEE CLEOPATRA his sister. 85 182 ■■'6 g Do. 252-333 Do. 835-375 161 165 2.— JONATHAN 17 a' < 1 Eh b 3985 PTOL. EVEEGETES IL PMa- con. Oac/iergetes. CLEOPATRA, wid. of Phi- lumeter. CLEOPATRA, Cocae. 29 147 8994 8 Do. 875-395 138 46il2 4.— JOHN HTEOANUB 29 Do. 895, vol. iv. 7.. 130 403i 4082 "i 27 :::; :... 4014 SOTEE IL Lathyrm 18 118 Prid. Con., vol iv.7-13.... Do. 13-43 101] 100 4032 PTOL. ALEXANDEE L Par- ys/U'tus. BERENICE, or CLEOPATRA,'h\i, daughter. 18 lOD 2.— ALEX. JANN^US 4030 PTOL. ALEXANDEE II 8 82 403S New Dionysius Atdetes. 16 74 4059 ».— ALEXANDRA 9 Do. 43-62 78 406S 4— AEISTOBULUS IL 6 Do. 63-99 64 40T4 5. HTECANU8 II 24 Do. 99-193 68 4074 4076 4079 4087 BERENICE, daugh. of Aulctes. PTOL. AULETES. again OLEOPA TRA, d. of Aul^es, . . Do. and her son CM- SAEION. 2 8 8 58 66 63 4098 6.— ANTIGONUS "2 Do. 198-204 '34 14 43 4100 82 Do. 204-359-862... 82 4101 EGYPT added the the Eoman dominions by OCTATIUS. 31 31 Commeuoement of the FOUKTH PROPHETIC KIliTGDOM-The EOMAH BMPIKB-by the Con- quest of EGYPT, as the last re- maining portion of Alexander's divided Empire. 41.S2 NATIVITY OF bHRIST .... Matthew 1 : 25, 2 : 1 ; Luke 2 ; 1-40. 1182 OF ANCIENT HISTORY. 197 PROFANE OHRONOLOQY. S7IIIA. 8371 ANTIOCHUS II. Tlieos . 3906 3909 3912 NAMES AND EVENTS. Trs. SELEITCUS II. OuUinious. SELEUCUS 111. Keraiai-us . ANTIOCHUS III., the Great . SELEUCUS IV. rhilopater. 3945 39oT ANTIOCHUS IV. Epiphanes . ANTIOCHUS V. Eupater. 3908DEMETEIUS 80TEE 89T0 ALEXANSEE BALAS .... DEMETEIUS NIOATOR I. . 4002 4005 4009 4021 4032 40-39 4040 ANTIOCHUS VI. Theos TIUPHON ANTIOCHUS VII DEMETEIUS NICATOE II. ALEXANDER ZEBIN A ANTIOCHUS VIIL Gryphaa.. ANTIOCHUS IX. Oyzicenus.. A.M. 36S9 3876 BOME. 5 150 12 ANTIOCHUS VIII.-IX., cotemporaneously. PHILIP, and ANTIOCHUS X. DEMETRIUS EUCJSRUS. . . . . TIGEANES, King of Armenia . 4049 ANTIOCHUS XI. Aiiaticiis.. 4068 4081 40S2 4085 Pius . iio.' detlironed by POMPEY, and STRIA made a ROMAN PROVINCE. STBIA UNDEB ROMAN GO YEBNOBS. BIBULUS Q. METELLU8 SCIPIO SEXTUS C^SAE 0AS8IUS .... VENTIDIUS ,„„PLANCUS 409SMESSALA CORVINUS NAMES AND EVENTS. Yrs. 187 REG ULU8. Takan prisoner . . . TEMPLE OF JANUS SHUT . SCIPIO, defeats Hannibal in Egypt First Roman army in Asia, under Scipio Aslaticus. Defeats Antiochus. 8984 3996 3999 14 65 4011 4013 CAETHAGE destroyed by Soipio Ncsica , CORINTH destroyed by L. Mummius. B.C. 443 256 202 190 SCIPIO NE8ICA TIBERIUS GRACCHUS. CAIUS GRACCHUS. Tribune. CAIUS MARIUS. Tribune JULIUS CaiSARborn. 4044 FIRST CIVIL WAR, between Marius and Scylla Cicero's first Oration. 4053 STLLA, Dictator, 3 years 4061 4068 8PARTACU8 POMPEY adds STRIA to the Roman dominions . LUCULLUS defeats Mithridates and Tlgrauus — 148 136 121 119 12 CATILINE CONSPIRACY CATULLUS.— FIRST TRIUMVIRATE. Pompoy, Julius CsBsar, and Crassus. 4074 GABINU8, Governor. Cicero banished 4077 OEASSUS, Governor AGEIPPA sentWsatueninus&t'it.volumnious. 4105 4110 4117 4119 4132WATiviTY OF CHRIST. WAR, between Octavius and Mark Antony. OOTAVIUS conquers EGYPT. 4106 Tlie First Emperor ofBome was 4086 JULIUS CfiSAR. Reforms the Roman Calendar. . J. cJeSAR assassinated in the Senate House 4094 SEC. TRIUM v.— Octavius, M. Antony, and Lepldus. 4096 LEPIDUS expelled 4099 4101 79 71 63 60 68 55 46 44 88 81 OOTAVIUS, second Emperor of Rome, with the title of C^SAR AUGUSTUS. 4182NATIVITY OF CHRIST. 27 27 SYNCHRONICAL CHRONOLOGY OF THE CHRISTIAN BOMAN AFPAIKS, Civil and Folitical. HISTOEY OF THE CHtTKCH, Internal and External. FIRST MEDIJEVAL A.M. 4182 4188 4144 4161 4162 4169 4n3 4171 4182 41 S6 4192 4196 4I9S 4200 4211 4213 4228 4230 4232 C^SAE AUGUSTUS, emp. .Tewisli discontent •I'IBEEIUS, emp. 19th y'r. Pont Pilate, proc. of Jadea. CALIGULA, emp CLAUDIUS, omp Close of the 62 weeks, or 434 yrs. III. Iiast week of the 70, or 490 yrs. Jews expelled from Kome. . NEEO, emp.. Burning of Borne. . The Jewish War begins.. GALEA, emp OTHO; TITELLIUS; emperors. Destruction of Jerusalem. . TITUS, emp DOMITIAN, emp NEEVA.cmp TEAJAH, emp VESPASIAN, NATIVITY OF CHRIST. Massacre of the Innocents Christ in tlie Temple, 1 2th year JOHN BAPTIST, begins his ministry. , OHEIST baptized, do CHRIST CRUCIFIED, middle of Dan- , iel's last week. (Dan. ix. 37.) I Conversion of COENELIUS, end of last f week. {^Acts x.) > PauPs first Journey Paul's second journey Paul's third journey. Paul sent to Eome Martyrdom of James. Paul released. Tke First Persecution, , Christians retire from Jerusalem to Pella. Martyrdom of Peter and Paul— the latter at Rome. St Peter's alleged visit to Rome, fabulous. 7%e Second Persecviion. Persecution relaxed — exiles recalled. . Death of St JOHN, about this time,. Trs. A.D. 1 1 11 12 17 29 1 30 7 87 4 41 4 45 5 50 4 54 6 60 &4 100 Resurrection. Ascension. PENTECOST. Herod persecutes the Church. Rapid spread of Christianity. The Ministry of the Church during this century were— Apostles, Evangelists. Pro- phuts, 'J'eaching and Ruling JElders, Deacons or Almon- ers, Deaconesses, Widows, j The Christian virtues flourish- ed, both in theory and prac- tice. But some disorders prevail, cither through human in- firmity, or the hypocrisy of false professors. The Apostles carry the Goppol into Palestine, Syria, A>ia Minor, Macedonia, Grec'*e. Italy, Egypt, etc.; and fS- tablish Churches at Jem a- lem, Antioch, Eome. Ah x- andria, Ephesus, Col()>■ Image {Dan. ii.), and by the Tkn HbEMS of the Fourth Beast otnan. vil, 7. EISE OF THE PAPACY (denoted by the Little Hoen of Dan. Tii. S), by the Edict of Justinian, in constituting the Bishop of Borne the head over all the Cliurches. Clotftire I., sole monarch of the Franks. JUSTIN XL, emperor Commencement of the FEUDAL SYSTEM about this time. TIBERIUS IL, emperor MAURITIUS, emperor. "War between the Greelts and Lombards. Chosroes II. restored. Peace witii Persia. Gregory the Great sends monies into Britain under AUGUSTIN. Ethelbert, king of Kent, baptized by Augustin. End of the war between the Greeks andljombards , Yrs. A.r>. 17 582 588 565 578 The Monarchy of the Sishop of Home gradually supersedes the Oligarchy of the Patriarchate. Justjnian destroys the rem nants of Paganism in his empire generally. During this century Chris- tianity is embraced by the Abasgt, the Heruli, the Alans, Lazi, Zani, and other nnoivilized tribes, besides many Jews in the East Popes in possession of large revenues. SEVENTH 4738 4731 4742 4778 4300 4817 4827 AUGUSTIN, appointed by GKEGOKY first archbishop of Canterbury PHOCAS, emperor .-. 606. MOHAMMED retires to the Cave of Mecca. HEEACL1U8, emperor 613, Clotaire II,, sole monarch of France, . HEGIEA, or Fliffht of Moliammed, His death, 10 years after, 634. Omar, (second caliph, pursues the victories of Moliammed. Between 687 and 640, JERUSALEM (see Dan. viii. 8-12, and 21-25), Antioch, all Syria, with Mesopotamia, Alexandria, and all Egypt, are in the hands of the Caliphs, C0N8TANTINE III,; HKKACLEONAS; then CON8TAN8 II,, cmperoi-s TH-EODORE. bishop of Eome, assumes the title of SOVEEEIGN PONTIFF. 653, The Western Oharch dissolves its communion with the Eastern, CONSTANTINE IV. (POGONATUS), emperor. JUSTINIAN II., emperor. Pope LEO IL, usurps the right of investiture Carthage in the hands ot the Saracens. LEONTIUS, emperor. Justinian deposed TIBEEIUS III., emperor 601 602 610 81 641 27 668 17 685 10 695 Christianity embraced in Es- sex. Also in Switzerland and Suabia, "Wessex. In Northumberland (Eng.), 1200 monks of Bangor were slaughtered by Ethelred, at the instigation, as is alleged, of Augustin, fur their re- sistance to the Papal do- minion, Romish ceremo- nies, etc. Conversion of the Heptarchy complete. Both England and Scotland, for the most part, conform to the customs of the Church of Rome. E la H T H 4837 4842 4845 4848 4849 4873 4907 4912 4929 JUSTINIAN III., emperor, Armenia and Africa (North) taken by Saracens.. Caliphs invade Europe — Spain. PH1LIPPICU8, emperor. End of the. Gothic Monarchy in Spain. ANA8TASIU8 II., emperor. Charles Martel, master of all France. 732. Checks the inroads of Mohammedanism west, by ibe defeat of the Arabians at Tours. THE0D0SIU8 IIL, emperor LEO HI. (I8AUEICUS), emperor. Prohibits the adoration of images Saracens besiege Constantinople. CONSTANTINE V. (COPEONTMUS), emperor The POPES having become Monarchs of the Church, aim at Supremacy over Temporal Princes. 749. Aistulph , king of the Lombards. 750. Ahul Abbas, caliph, first of the Abhasides. PEPIN, sole monarch of France. 751. The Lombards attack Eavenna. 756. Besiderins, king. CIIAELEMAGNE, king of the FEANKS. ' In 771 is sole monarch. LEO IV., emperor CON 8TANTINE VI 797. Two celebrated forgeries— the False Decretals and Donation of Constantine. IRENE, empress 7 705 6 710 S 713 3 1 716 717 24 741 34 5 775 780 17 797 The Spanish Christians recov- er their religions liberty, Bede promotes theological learning in England. Winii-ied, under Gregory II., preaches in Germany. 768. The Eastern and 'Western Churches at variance re- specting the doctrine of the double procession of the Holy Ghost. NINTH 4934 4945 4946 4952 4961 4999 CHAELEM AGNE, emperor of the West IRENE deposed NIOEPnoEUS (LOGOTHETA), emperor of the East Decline of the Caliphate. The Western Empire declines, MICHAEL I. (after Stauricius), emperor of the East LEO V. (the Armenian), emperor of the East LOUIS the Pious, emjieror of the West MICHAEL II. (BALBUS), emperor of the East „ 827, Saxon Heptarchy united under Egbert, THE0PHILU8, emperor of the East 842, Scotland, Ken. MoAlpine. 848. Partition of the WESTERN EMPIEE into ITALY, GEEMANT, and PBANCE. LOTHATEE, emperor of Italy. LOUIS, king of Germany. CHAELES the Bald, king of France. The Eussian Monarchy founded by Eurio. 866, Conquests and ravages of the Danes in England, BASIL, emperor of the East CIIAKLES, emperor and king of Italy. Beginning of tliu Maordonian Dynasty. 800 811 818 814 867 Aside fi-om Italy and France, the power of the Pope was at its highest pitch in Eng- land, and its lowest condi- tion in Spain. Balbus not satisfied with the dominant clergy, and many of the Church doctrines, eto. The Church lends its sanction to the barbarous custom of Ordeals. Pontifical power greatly In- creased under Nicholas. OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION. 203 DOCTKIBTES & COEEtrPTIOlTS, BeUgious Ceremonies, etc. COiriTOILS. KEMAKKABLE PEKSOBTS. 529. Pelagians and Seml-Pclagians. Final tri- umph of the Aiigustinian or Church doc- trines, concerning Grnco and Predestination, over the above-named heresies. 688. Codea Bepetitoa Praleotionis, or Justin- ian's Code, published. Growth of Superstition. The Monophosites formed into a distinct sect Rise of the dispute between the Eastern and Western Churches concerning the Proces- sion of the Holy Ghost For a considerable period, the Councils in the West were occupied chiefly with matters of ' 00EU8. Ecclesiastical Discipline; while those of the East are engaged in points of theological (532.) JOHN II. controversy. 648. Cov/ncil of OonatanUnople. 668. See'd Council of CONSTAITTINOFLE. Fifth General CouNon.. Convened to set- tle the controversy connected with the Tria CapittUa. 56T. Ooimail of Lyons, depose two disorderly bishops. 586. Council of Toledo, inflicts pains and pen- alties upon the Jews. Sixth Bohism, (580.) BONIFACE II., versus DIOS- (585.) AGAPETUS. Seventh Schism. (."ise.) 8ILVEEIUS, versus TI6ILIU8. (565.) PELAGIUS I. (600.) JOHN III. (574.) BENEDICT I. (5T8.) PELAGIUS II. John Philiponis, a Christian philosopher, (690.) GKEGOET I. CENTURY. Pelagians. Nestorians. Manicheans, Doctrine of Purgatory established. Pictures and Images in the West Festival of All Saints. Use of Bells in churches introduced. Monothellte controversy. Hcraclius Issues an edict, ^ JSatpoeiiion of the Faitlt^ to sup- press it Clerical Celibacy now strictly enforced. Paulicians (680) persecuted. Christian doctrines become more and more ob- scured. The ofiBces of divine worship re- stricted to the Latin language. Private Masses celebrated. Superstition continually increases, and vice abounds more and more, especially among the clergy. Image Worship extensively prevalent Haronites. Of the OownciU of this century, six were held in Borne, fifteen in Toledo. 604, 6. Worcesterr, Canterbury, London. 615. Paris. 619. Seville. 625, 6. Constantinople, BJieims. 688. Alexandria. 646. Africa. 649. Tlt^ssaUmica. 660. Nantes. 664. Ciywneil qf Whitby. 670. BordeoMX. 678. Hertford. 679. MiUm. 660. ComtaU of CONSTANTINOPLE. Sixth General Counoil. 689. Bojien. 691. Saragassa. 692. CONSTANTINOPLE. QUINIBEX- TUM. TEULLANUM. All concerned principally about matters of Doctrine and Discipline. (604) BABINUS. (606.) BONIFACE III. (608.) BONIFACE IV. (615.) DEUSDEDIT. (619.) BONIFACE V. (625.) H0NOEIO8 L (640.) 8EVEEINU8. JOHN IT. (642.) THEODOEE. (649.) MAETIN I. (654.) EU6ENIU8 I. (657.) VITALIAN. (672.) ADE0DATU8. (676.) DOMNUS. (678.) AGATHO. ■682.) LEO II. 684.) BENEDICT II. '6S6.) JOHN V. '686.) CONON. 687.) SEE61US I. CENTURY, The emperor Leo favors the Paulicians. 726. Now begins the vexationSnControversy respecting the use of Images, which con- tinued until 842, when the practice was final- ly confirmed and legalized. 784. Saxou translation of St John's Gospel by Bede. First payment of tithes in Britain. Frequent pilgrimages to Eome. Increased wealth of the Monastic Orders. The fundamental doctrines of the Church re- tained, but greatly corrupted. Tradition^ not Scripture, made the arbiter in contro- versy. 792. Peter's Pence. Of the CowncUs in this century, ten were held in Borne, three in Batisbon, four in Con- stantinople, 701. Toledo. 708. Nester/ield, Eng. 742. Cfermany. 743. Leptinm. 744 Soissons. 745. Germany. 747. Cloveshoo, Eng. 752. Menti. 755. Yern. 756. England, Oompeigne, Attigny. 766. JEBUSALEM. 777 and 780. Paderborn. 782. Cologne. 787. NICjSIA. Seventh Gehebal Council. In England, two, Ca/nterbury and York, in presence of Papal Legates. 798. Yerulam. 799. Finkley. Principally concerning Discipline and Image Worship. (701.) JOHN YL (705.) JOHN VIL (708.) SISSIMU8. CONSTANTINE. (716.) GEE60ET IL Winfried, Ger- many. Bede, in England. (731.) GEEGOET IIL (741.) ZACHAKT. (752.) STEPHEN IL STEPHEN IIL (757.) PAUL L (768.) STEPHEN IT. Alcuin, Eng. (772.) ADEIAN L 780. Serglus, the Paullcian. 786. Haroun Al Easchid. (795.) LEO IIL CENTURY, Improvement; in Christian knowledge among the Saxons. Eevival of Literature in Europe. Flourishing period of Arabian- Literature. General Monastic corruptions. The EtJoHA- BIST. Doctrine of Transubsta/nMation. Temporary Suppression of Image Worship. Claude, bishop of Turin, opposes the supersti- tions usages of the Chnrch, unsound doc- trines, and the usurped Papal authority itself. Images restored. Paulicians persecuted. Ig- norance and vice prevail. Predestlnarlan controversy. Cyril translates the Bible into the Slavonian Itingudge. Celibscy rigidly enforced by the Canons o Worms. Of the Councils in this century, fourteen were held in Borne, eight In Constantinople, nine in M&ntz, five in Compeigne, five in Aix-la- Chapelle, four in Paris. 823. Thionville, Cloveshoo, Eng., Attigny, 826. Ingelheim. 882. 4. St. Denis. 835. Thionville. 838. Chiercy. 841. Tours. 844. Vern. 845. Meaux. 848. Limoges, Sretagne, L/yons. 849. Cliartres, Pa/ris, Pamiii. 851, 2. Beningdon, Eng., Cordova. 853. Soissons, OMercy, Frankjbrt-on-the- Mavne, Paris, Borne. 855. Valence, Pcma, Bonosuil, Winchester, Eng. 857. Ohiercy. 858. Worms, Chiercy. 859. Langres. 862, Soissons. 86-3. Verberia. 1 865, 6. Attigny, Pavla. Soinsons. 867. Truyea. 668. Worms. (816.) STEPHEN T. (817.) PASCAL L (824.) EUGENIUS IL (827.) VALENTINE. (8a8.) GEEGOET IV. (844.) SEE6IUS IL (847.) LEO IV. (858.) BENEDICT IIL Ansgar. (868.) NICHOLAS I. (867.) ADRIAN IL 204 STNCHRONICAL CHBONOLOGT HISTOKT OF THE CHTTKCH, Internal and External. A.M. 5018 50S1 Open and Pinal Sohism between tie Eastern and 'Western Churclies. CHARLES the Fat, reunites the 'Western Empire. Is deposed. Western Empire dissolved. Italy independent Kingdom of Germany divided. AI.FKEB the Great, king of England, LEO YL, emperor of the East 8sa AENULPH, emperor of Germany. 898. GHABLES the Simple, liing of France. LOUIS, emperor of Germany ; Trs. The king of Bohemia baptized by Methodius. Christianity introduced among the Hungarians. TENTH 5043 903. Turks obtain authority in the Caliphate of Bagdad. 909. Dynasty of the Fatimites in 'Western Africa founded. AT.'R'^ANn'RT?., pmpp.rnr nf thfi "Rnst 12 1 7 26 14 4 6 4 8 7 911 912 919 945 959 968 969 973 976 983 King Gorm persecutes' the Christians in Denmark. Christianity opposed in Bohe- mia. Also in Poland. Is introduced in Ireland a- mong the Normans. Pope John XIL deposed by Otho for perfidy. He confirms the grants of Charlemagne to the Pope. Christianity established in Norway, Hungary, eta The idea of the OBUSADES first suggested by Sylvester . II. t 5044 5051 CONSTANTINE VII. (P0EPHTE06ENITUS), emperor of the East mother, Zoe). 916. BEEEN6EE, king of Italy and emperor of the "West EOMANUS (LE0APBNU8), emperor of the East (under his 50T7 919. HENET the Fowler, emp. of Germany, 924 ATHELSTAN, king of England. 940. Athelstan, king of "Wales. OTHO the Great, emperor of Germany. CONSTANTINE VIL emperor of the East, restored 5091 948. EDEED, king of England. Civil wars in France. 951. Otho invades Italy ; again in 961, and is crowned king and emperor. EOMANUS II., emperor of the East EDGAE, king of England 5095 NICEPHOEUS II. (PHOCUS), emperor of the East 5101 965. Extends the Eastern Empire. JOHN ZIMISOES, emperor of the East 5105 HAROLD, king of Denmark, OTHO II., emperor of the "West BIOS The Greek Church is rent by numerous schisms. BASIL IL and CONSTANTINE IX., emperors of the East 5115 Huns, Avars, and other barbarians : also tine Persians and Eussians, harass the Eastern Empire. ETHELEED, king of England. OTHO III., emperor of the 'West crowned 996 985. Edwy, king of Wales. HUGH CAPET, king of France. Normans Invade Italy. Seljukian Tarks conquer Asia Minor. 98T. EOBEET, king of France. ELEVENTH 5184 5156 5157 5160 5166 5173 5174 5186 5187 5189 5191 5199 5200 5203 5210 5218 5231 HENRY II., emperor of Germany and kinp: of Italy. Bulgaria asrnin added to the Greek Empire. 1018. SWETN, king of Denmark and England. 1016. EDMUUD IL, t. of England 1016. CANUTE the Great king of Denmark and England C0NEAJ3 II.. emperor of Germany. Franconian or Salic Dynasty begins. CONSTANTINE, sole emperor of the East EOMANUS II., emperor of the Ea-i' the Pope with contempt 1106 1118 1118 1125 1138 1148 1152 Continued struggles between tbe Popes and other pre- lates, and the temporal prin- Knights of St JoKn of Jeru- salem, Order of Knights Templars instituted. The Gospel introduced among the Tartar tribes. Also in Sweden. Arnold of Brescia ihveighs against the Papal system. OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION. 205 DOCTKINES & COBBUPTIOWS, Beligious Ceremonies, eto. COTTIfCILS. BEMAEKABLE PEESOIfS. ]8T0. Vienne, AtUgmy, Cologne, Spcdatm. Rise of Mariolatry. George, metropolitan of 871. Dovai. _878. S&iiliSj^ Cologne. Kicomedia. Image Torehip in England. The Monopliosites dominant in Egypt 874. Sovziy JiaveriTta^ Ji?ieim8, eto., etc. 896. Some, against Pope rormosns. 89S. do. do. Abortive attempts to refute Moliammedan er-JThese Councils legislated principally on mat- rors. ters of Discipline, Image Worship, Church Property, etc. :872.) JOHN VIII. ^8S2.) MAETIN II. (884.5 ADRIAN III. (885.) STEPHEN VI. 8S8. Count Eudes. (891.) F0EM08US. (896.) STEPHEN VJI. (898.) ROMANUS. THEODOEUS II. JOHN IX. (X.) (900.) BENEDICT IV., LEO V., and CHRISTOPHER, rivals. CENTURY. Theological Literature was now at its lowest ebb. Controversy was hashed in ignorance and apathy. Christianity gains a firmer footing in England. Anthropomorphites. Expected approaching End of the World pre- vails. Superstition and errors prevail on the subjects^ of Purgatory, Saint Worship, and the 953. AugshwrgK Sitcharist. Baptism of Bells by the Pope. 95S. Ingelheim, Celibacy of the Clergy in England enjoined. Of the Councils in this century, thirteen were held in Homey four in Constantinople, three in Jiavenna, five in Rkei/ms, five in Eng- land. 906. Barcelona. 909. Trosley. 921. do. 922. Cohlents. 927. Treves. Reformation of the dissolute Clergy. 982. BaUsbon, Brford, Dingelfind. 935. Fimes. 941. Solssons. 946. Astorga. 947. NarJ>onn^ Verdun. ,948. Mouson, In^elhevm, London. Transubstantiaiion. Prayers enjoined for sonls in Purgatory. Slavonians relapse into Paganism. Ulrich, bishop of Augsburgb, canonized as a Saint — first instance on record. 978. Cahie. Use of Boaaries begins. 979. IngeUieim. 992. Aix-la-C/tapeUe. 993. Zateran. 995. Mouson. 997. Pavia. I Principally on Discipline and Church property. S.) LEO V. CHRISTOPHER. -- SEEGIUS IIL 905. Eollo. (910.) ANASTA8IU8 IIL (913.) LAN DON. (914.) JOHN X. -"8.) LEO VI. 9.) STEPHEN VIIL (981.) JOHN XI. (936.) LEO VIL (980.) STEPHEN IX. (948.) MAETIN III. for II.) (946.) AGAPETUS II. (966.) JOHN XIL (968.) LEO VIII. (964) BENEDICT V. (965.) JOHN XIII. (972.) BENEDICT VI. (974.) D0MNU8 IL (976.) BENEDICT VII. (984.) JOHN XIV. (985.) JOHN XV. (996.) 6EEG0ET V. (999.) 8YLVESTEE IL CENTURY, Mohammedanism spreads from the Caspian Sea to the Ganges. Falberti bishop of Chartres, promotes Mariola- try. Chbibtendoh a sinqlB' Ebpublio, with the Pope as the Spiritual, and the Emperor as the Secular Head. The Pontiffs chosen by the Emperors fVom the time of Otho the Great to Henry IV. Corrupt doctrines and morals prevail Pil- grimages to the Holy Land frequent. Berenger condemned for opposing Transub- BtanfiatioD. Chatch discipline abnsed and ineffective. Order of the Brethren of St. Antony. Monastic Orders. Disputes between Realists and Nominalists. The Era of Scholastic Theology begins. Celibacy strictly enforced. Religious flagellation introdaced. Saturday celebrated in honor of the Virgin Mary. Of the Councils of this century, twenty were held in Borne, three in Constaniin/?ple, two in Blieims, four in Poitiers, nine in Eng- land, two in Pavia — 1024, several in France, again in 1084, again in 1041— si.\ in Mente. 1007. Fra/nkjbrt-on-fhe- Maine. 1009. Milan. 1018. Nimeguen. 1026. Ai^as. 1029. Limoges. 1031. Bourges, Limoges. 1036. Tribur. 1040. Venice. 1046. SUTBY. 1053. Mantua. 1054. Narbon/ne. 1055. Florence, Angers, Lyons, Rouen, 1056. CoTnposteUo, Toulouse. 1069. SUTBY, Aries. 1060. Vienne, Tours, Toulouse. 1061. Basle. 1062. Angers. 1067. Mantua. 1068. Oiironne, Barcelona, Toulouse. 1069. Spalatro. 1072. Chalons, Bouen. 1078. Erprd. 1076. Worms. 1076, 7. Liion, Autun. 1080. Several in Cagaua. 1090. TotiZome. 1091. Leon, in Spain. 1092. Soissons. 1098. Bheims. 1094. Constance, Autrni, Bheims. 1096. Plaaentia. 1096. Bouen, Tows, nine times. 1097. Ireland. On Discipline, Transubstantiatlon, Reforma- tion of the Clergy, against Simony, etc., etc. (1008.) JOHN XVII. JOHN XVIIL (1009.) SEEGIUS IV. (1012.) BENEDICT VIII., versus (1024.) JOHN XVIII. or XIX, versus (1034.) BENEDICT IX. 1 Three SYLVESTER IIL V Popes at (1044.) GREGORY VI. ) one time. AH three deposed by the Council of Sutry, which elects (1046.) CLEMENT IL. or SUIDGER, versus BENEDICT IX., second time, versus (1048.) DAMA8U3 IL (1049.) LEO IX. (1054.) VICTOR IL Robert Guiscard. (1057.) STEPHEN X. (1058.) NICHOLAS IL [BENEDICT X.] (1062.) ALEXANDER IL (1073.) GREGORY VIL (1080.) CLEMENT IIL, anUpope. (1086.) VICTOR IIL (1087.) URBAN IL 1095. Peter the Hermit. 1096. Godfrey of Bouillon, etc (1099.) PASCHAL IL CENTURY. Elevation of the Host in celebrating the Eu- charist Communion in one kind. Monasteries in France, Germany, England, Ireland, Denmark, and Sweden. 1122. COHOOEDAT OF WOEMS. Petrobrussians. Struggles of the Scholastic Theology with the more practical, and the traditional or eccle- siastical systeme. Prohibition of ihe reading of Scripture, except the Psalter in Latin. Festival of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary introduced. Doctrine of the Seven Sacraments established. Also, Confes- sion of Sins to a priest Of the Councils in this century, there were seven in Borne, thirty-four in England, five in Bheims, two in Soissons, two in Troyes, several in France, several for the promotion of Crusades. 1103, 17. MiUm. 1104. Paris. 1105. Quediinbwrg, Florence. 1106. Poitiers. 1108. Benevento. 1110. Clermont, Toulouse. 1112. Vienne, Jerusalem. 1114. Leon, Compostdlo. 1116. Cologne. 1118. Capua, Bouen, Vienne. 1119. Cologne, Toulouse. 1122. Worms. \MS. LATEBAN L Ninth Gen. Coohoil. 1134 Pisa. 1189. LATEBANIL Tenth Gen. Ooumoii. 1140. Sens. 1143. Jerusalem. 1145. Bourges (Crusade). 1146. (Crusade.) (1118.) GELASIU8 IL GREGORY VIIL, antipope. (1119.) CALIXTUS IL (1124.) H0N0EIU8 IL (1130.) INNOCENT IL, ANACLETUS II. (a double election). (1187.) VICTOR IIL, succeeded Ana- cletus. (1138.) INNOCENT IL (1143.) CELESTINE II. (1144.) LUCIUS IL (1145.) EU6ENIUS IIL 206 SYNCHEONICAL CHRONOLOGY HISTOBY OF THE CHUHCH, Internal and External. A.M. 6312 5315 5317 Bise of the 'Waldenses. Italian Lengae. Frederick defeated at Legnano. Murder of Thomas A Secket Pope incensed against Henry II. ALEXIS II. (OOMNENUS), emperor of the Kast PHILIP II. (Augustus), king of France. ANDRONICOS COMNENUS, emperor of the East. ISAAC ANGELUS, emperor of the East HENBY VI., emperor of Germany. BICHABD I., king of England. TEE TBIBD OBUSADK Domiulons of Saladln divided. ALEXIS III., emperor of the East Isaac Angelus deposed 1199. JOHN, king of England. The Power of the Boman Pontiffs had now nearly reached its height. Trs. 10 K.H. 1180 1183 1186 1195 Tumults at Borne against the authority of the Pope. Struggle between the Ghibe- lines and Guelphs. The Waldenses forbidden to preach. Are excommuni- cated. Albigenses. THIRTEENTH 5388 5340 5360 5882 5-387 5391 5405 5415 1202. TEE FOURTB CRUSADE. ISAAC and ALEXIUS, emperors of the East Dgengis Khan Crusaders take Constantinople. Isaac and Alexins killed. ALEXIUS DUCAS MUZUPHILUS, emperor of the East LA TIN EMPIBE.—B&.lAmnS, Latin emperor at Constantinople. HlfiNBT, Latin emperor at Constantlijopla OTHO IV., emperor of Germany. 1212. JOHN, king of England, deposed by the Pope. FREDERICK II., emperor of Germany. Is favored by the Pope. Magna Charta. .. HENRY IIL, king of England. ' THE FIFTH CB USADE. JOHN IL (VATAZES), Greek emperor. Successful against the Latins 1223. LOUIS VIIL, king of France. 1226. LOUIS IX. (St), king of France. THE SIXTH CBVSADE. The "Western Empire gradually decays. 1248. THE SEVENTH CBVSADE. Continued troubles and anarchy in Germany. CONRAD IV., emperor of Germany THEODORE LAS0ARI8 IL, Greek emperor THEODORE LASCAEIS IV., Greek emperor End of the Caliphate of Bagdad. MICHAEL PAL.«10L0GUS. Greek emperor End of the Latin Empire in the East 1270. THE EIGHTH (.and last) CB USADE. EODOLPH of Hapsburg, emperor of Germany. EDWARD L, king of England. 1282. PETER IIL, king of Arason and Sicily. ANDE0NICU8 IL, emperor of Constantinople 1291. End of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. 1298. ALBERT of Austria, emperor of Germany. The OTTOMAN EMPIRE hxmieA by OTHMAN .' 1204 1206 1208 1228 1250 1265 1259 1261 1278 1283 1299 Church of Constantinople sub- ject to the Roman See. John submits to the Pope, surrenders his kingdom to him, and receives it back as fief of the See of Rome. The Power of the Holy See now at its Height. Quarrels between the Pope and Emperor. Origin of the Hanseatic League. 1265. The Commons admitti'd into the English Parlia- ment The ardor for Crusades sub- sides. FOURTEENTH 5460 6473 5501 6523 EDWARD IL, king of England. 1308. HENRY VII., of Luxemburg, emperor of Germany. 1311. LOUIS X., king of France. 1316. PHILIP v., king of France. 1827. LOUIS, of Bavaria,- emperor of Germany. EDWARD IIL, king of England. ANDRONICUS IIL, emperor of Constantinople. PHILIP VI., king of France. . . . JOHN PAL.SOLOGUS, emperor of Constantinople 1347. CHARLES IV., of Luxemburg, emperor of Germany. Rienzi. — Democracy in Rome. 1350. JOHN, king of France. 1860. Amurath L, Sultan of Turkey. 1362. Janizaries established. Bajazet 1464. CHARLES V., the Wise, king of France. TIMOUR, or TAMERLANE, founds a New E-mpibe in the East 1877. RICHARD II , king of England. 1878. WENCE8LAUS, emperor of Germany. Commencement of the Great Western Sohisu. 1380. CHARLES VL, king of France. 1381. CHARLES IIL, king of Naples. MANUEL II., emperor of Constantinople 1399. HENRY IV., king of England. ROBERT (Count Palatine), emperor of Germany. IS 1841 1369 1391 1400 1305. Clement V. removes the seat of the Papacy to Avi- QHON. 1811. Order of Knights Tem- plars suppressed. Papists and Nestorians carry the Gospel to China and Tartary. Clement VI. entirely in the interests of France. Sijatute of Prcamwnire in England. The system of Confucius pre- vails In China. 1377. The Scat of the Papal See again removed to Boue. 1889. BecUue of the Papacy. FIFTEENTH Empire of Tamerlane dismembered and destroyed. 1411. SIGISMUND, emperor of Germany. 1419. King of Bohemia. 1418. HENEY T., king of England. Henry Y., the acknowledged heir of the kingdom of France. Schism in the Bee of Kome. Council of Pisa. The schism increases. 1414. Peace between the Pope and the King of Naples. QetCl CkywncU of Constance^ for the termination of the Schism. OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION. 207 DOCTEINES & COREUPTIOWS, Beligious Ceremonies, etc. COTJUCILS. BEMABKABIiE FUBSONS. The Doctrines now taught relate to Papal Au- thority, Auricular Confession, Indulgences, Transubstautiation, etc., etc. Carmelite Order. Tuomas & Becket canonized. The Festivals of the Church caricatured by heathen revelries and buffoonery, under the auspices of the clergy. 115T. Kim. 1159. Menle. 1160. PamOj Anagni. 1161. Toulouee^ Lodi, Seav^aUo. 1168. Toura. 1165. Aia>-la-Ohapelle. 11G9. Kiev. 1172. Avrcmches. 117T. Conference at Tarsue, for the reunion of Armenians and Greeks. I 1179. LA TBIiAU III. Elbvbhth Gbkhral CotTNOIL. 1180. Tarragona. 1190. Ifarionne. 1190. Lancieki, Poland. For discipline, against heretics, Waldenses, etc., etc. (1164.) ADRIAN IT. (1159.) ALEXANDER III. I Eival VICTOE IT. ( Popes. (1164.) PASCHAL IIL, in place of Tic- tor IT. (1168.) CALIXTUS IIL, in place of Pas- chal IIL (1181.) LUCIUS IL (1186.) UEBAN III. (1187.) GEEGOEY TIIL CLEMENT III. (1191.) CELESTINE IIL (1199.) INNOCENT IIL CENTURY. 1206. Incipient foundation of the Inqxtisition. 1207. Else of the Franciscan Order of Mendi- cants. Albigenses severely persecuted in the'South of France. Waldenses continue independent Witnesses OP THE Tbutb, and suffer violent persecution. Transubstantiation now made an Article of Faith, by the Fourth Laterau Council. Au- ricular Confession enforced. Origin of the Dominican Order. Some true light and piety amid the general prevalence of ignorance and BUj^erstition, which had now attained their height. Tiolent disputes among the Franciscans. Scriptures prohibited. 1082. iNQinSITOEES H^BBETIC^ PeAVITATIS. (Dominicans.) 1288. Carmelite Order of monks. 1256. Wm. de St. Amour publishes his book, "Perils of the Last Ttmee." Hermits of Augustin. 1260. Apostolicals in Italy Inveigh against the prevalent corruptions. 1264 Festum Corporis Domini. 1282. The Franciscans (Spiritual) oppose the dominant Church. 1290. Apostolicals condemned as heretical. Sa- garelli burnt, 1800. 1899. Mariolatry now at its height 13U0. The Fibst Jubilee at Eoue. The Cotmcils in this century were, two at Aries, thirty-one in EnglanoLtvto at Avi- gnon-, twelve in Paris and liome, two in Karbonne, six in Constantinople, two. in Jiouen, nine iu Tarragona, several in Prance, two in Menia, three in Sesiers, three in Cognac. 1201. Soissons. 1209. Avignon. 1215. LATEBAN IV. Twelfth Geneeal CotrNoiL. 1222. Slesmo. 1224. Montpellier. 1226. Cremona. 1227. Treves. 1229. Lerida; also 1287 and 1248. 1282. Mecea. 1286. Tours (in favor of the Jews). 1289. St Qmntin, Sens; also in 1256. 1245. £ Y0N8. TniKTEENTH Geheeal CorN- OIL. 1246. FritiHar. 1248. .Breslau, Valence. 1253. Bavenna. 1254 CastU Gontier. 1260. Cologne; also 1261. 1264 Nantes, Bologna. 1266. Bremen. 1267. Viemna. 1270. Cormpeigne, Avignon. 1274. L YOI/S. FotTKTEEHTH Gehekal Coun- cil. 1276. Bourges. 1279. Seziers, Avignon. 1281. Cologne, Sattelmrg. 1286. Bavmwi, Macon, JSowgea. 1287. 91. Milan, Saltebvrg. 1294. Sawmur. 1299. Bouem. Principally on Doctrine, Discipline, EcclesiaS' tical Privileges, and Church Property. (1216.) HONOEIUS IIL JBernard. Hildebert, archbishop of Tours. (1227.) GEEGOEY IZ. Guibert. Eckbert Abelard. (1241.) CELESTINE IT. .(18 days). Interregnum of twenty months. (1244) INNOCENT IT. (1254) ALEXANDEE IT. Thomas Aquinas. (1261.) UEBAN IT. (1265.) CLEMENT IT. Interregnum of threeyears. (1271.) GEEGOEY X. (1276.) INNOCENT T. ADRIAN T. JOHN XX. (XXI.) (1277.) NICHOLAS IH. (1281.) MAETIN IT. 128-3. Robert Bruce. (1285.) HONOEIUS IT. (128S.) NICHOLAS IT. Interregnum of two years. (1294) CELESTINE T. BONIFACE TIIL 1296. William Wallace. CENTURY. Unam Sanctum, declaring the doctrine of the sovereign and unlimited power of the Pope an Article of Faith. 1802. Lollards in Antwerp. Scholastic Theol- ogy begins to dec^. 1309. Waldenses in Bohemia. Precwsors of tfie Ebpokmation. 1325. Ave Maria, repeated three times daily. 1834 Flagellants in Italy. Penance and lu dulgences. The Second Jubilee celebrated at Rome. Ecclesiastical abuses prevail 1851. Bowing the head at the name of Jesus. )8J6. WICELIFFB publishes his book on " The Last Age of the Chwreh.'" 1860. JouN MiLicz, of Prague, preaches re- pentance and faith. 1374 Wickliffe declares the Pope to be Anti- oheibt. Is charged with heresy by the monks. 1380. Wickliffe translates the Scriptures into ISnglish. 1881. Opposes Transubstantiation. 1382. Retires to Lutterworth. 1884. His death. The Thied Jubilee at Eomc. 1892. Call foe a Eefoematiok. The Councils in this century were, seven in Pa/ris, three in Tarragona, four in Cologne, two in Avignon, two in Bavenna, fifteen in England, three in Constantinople, three in Toledo, three in Magdeiurg, two in Sala- manca, two in Ments, two in Cambray. 1801. Melvm, Bheims. 1803. UTogaro. 1307. Aquilia; 5i«a, Armenia Minor. 1811. Presbwg. KT-EaOOT— Fifteenth Gen ERAL Council. 1818. Smlis. 1820. 5e««, MaUe. 1322. Valladolid. 1326. SenUs, Manac 1830. Kerna, in Armenia. 1885. PrS. 1886. Bourges, CasOe Ooniier. 1387 Treves. 1340. Nicosia, in Cyprus. 1342. Sarnnmr. 1844. Noyon. 1845. Armenia. 1850. PaAua. 1855. Prague. 1866. Angers. 1868. Vpsala, Lavour. 1874 Narionne. 1888. Cambray. 1888. Valmtia, Palermo. 1892. Prague. On Doctrine, Discipline, Church Property, and against the Wickliffiteb, or Lollards. (1803.) BENEDICT XL (Eoman See vacant) (1805.) CLEMENT T. (1816.) JOHN XXI. ^. Edw. Baliol. David Bruce. (1884.) BENEDICT XIL (1842.) CLEMENT TL (1852.) INNOCENT TL (1862.) UEBAN T. 1869. Alphonso. 187L) GEEGOEY XL (1 1877. Wat Tyler. (1878.) UEBAN TL (1889.) BONIFACE IX. CENTURY. 1407. Wickliffe— his doctrines condemned in London. 1409. Huss and Jeeome of Prague. 1410. Wickliffe's and Huss's writings burnt 1412. Sale of Indulgences. Huss and Jerome protest against them. Hues suirinioncd be- fore i he Council of Constonoe, and is Burnt, .July 6, 1414 The Councils in this century were, seven in England, three in Paris, two in Mente, two in Aschaffmibwg. 1406. Hamburg. 1408. Bheims, Perpignan. 1409. Frankfort, Florence, Pisa., Aquilia. 1410. Salamanca. 1412, 18. Borne. 1414, 1418. CONSTANCE. Seventeenth Genebal Council. (1404) INNOCENT TIL (1406.) GEEGOEY XII. ,,,„oO GEEGOEY XIL (1409.) < BENEDICT XIIL, deposed. ALEXANDEE T. (1410.) JOHN XXII. (XXIII.) (1415.) GEEGOEY abdicates. (1417.) MAETIN T. 208 SYNCHEONICAL CHBONOLOGT HISTOET OF THE CHXTECH, Internal and External. A.M. 65S0 658S 6625 1422. HENET VI., king of England. 1429. The Maid of Orleans. 1431. Eiae of the Medici Family, at Florence. 1488. ALBERT of Austria, emperor of GermanT. 1440. FEEDEEICK III., emperor of Germany. 1441. Invention of tue Aut of Printing. OONSTANTINE XI. (PAL^OLOGUS), emperor of Constantinople 1453. Constantinople taken by the Turks. END OF THE EASTERN OB GREEK EMPIRE. 1454. End of English Government in France, 1456. Civil Wars in England. 1461. LOUIS XI., king of France. EDWAED IT., king of England, 1468. CHAELES VIII., k. of France. EDWAED V., k. of Eng. EICHAED IIL, do. 1485. HENEY VII., king of England. 1492. End of the Saracen Empire in Spain. Discovery of America. MAXIMILIAN I., emperor of Germany 1498. LOUIS XII., king of France. Trs. A.D. . 1443 1458 Sigismund labors for a refor- mation — is defeated. A JtmiiEE In Borne. The Jews oppressed by Pope Calixtus m. 1456. Abortive attempt to raise a Crusade against the Turks. 1475. Another Jubilbe at Eome. During the late Pontificates, the corruption and profliga- cy of the Court of Eome had risen to an enormous height. SIXTEENTH MODERN HENET VUL, king of England , 1515. PEANCIS I., king of France. 1516. CHAELES L, king of Spain, Naples, Sicily, and the Netherlands. OoNOOBDAT between Francis and Leo, repealing the Prf^matic Sanction. 1509 1516 1502. Eevival of Literature in Germany. Cardinal Wolsey very power ful in England. 1511. France laid under an interdict by the Pope, Ju- lius II. ERA OF THE 6651 CHAELES v., emperor of Germany— the last crowned by a Pope, 1680. 1520. Increased jealousy between Spain and France. Leo X. attaches himself to the cause of the emperor. 1521. First war between Charles V. and Francis I. CHEI8TIAN IIL, king of Denmark and Norway. 1519 1517. Christianity Introduced into Spanish America. 1520. End of the First Period in the History of the Ger- man Eeformation. HISTOET OF THE GEEEK AND LATIN CHUECHES. A. M. HISTOKY OE THE CHTTBCH, Internal and External. Trs. A.D. POPES, etc. 1647. EDWAED VL, king of England. FEEDINAND L, emperor of Germany. PHILIP IL, king of Spain 1666. HENET IL, king of France. MARY, queen of England. 1558. ELIZABETH, queen of England. 1659. FEANCIS II., king of France. 1660. CHAELES IX., do. The Papal System now broken, but not overthrown. MAXIMILIAN IL, emperor of Germany 1572. Massacre of Protestants in Paris on St Bartholomew's day. 1572. Insurrection in the Netherlands. 1574. HENET IIL, king of France. 1576. EUDOLPH IL, emperor of Germany, warmly attached to the Eo- mish See. 1586. Babington's Conspiracy against Elizabeth. 1589. HENET IV., king of France. 1664 (1660.) JULIUS IIL (1566.) MAE0ELLU8 IL PAUL IV. (1559.) PIUS IV. Jesuit Missionaries in China. 1567. Bull supporting Papal Supremacy. (1566.) PIUS V. Bold Hierarchical claims. (1572.) GEEGOET XIIL Controversy between the Greek and So- man Churches continues. (1585.) SIXTU8 V. (1590.) UEBANVIL GEEGOET XIV. (1591.) INNOCENT IX. (1692.) CLEMENT VIH SEVENTEENTH 5786 6742 5744 6761 6757 5769 5T71 6778 6779 5807 5810 6819 6822 JAMES I., king of Great Britain 1604 CHAELES IX., king of Sweden. 1606. Gunpowder Plot in England detected. LOUIS XIH., king of Fiance. 1611. GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS, king of Sweden. MATTHIAS, emperor of Germany Eoman Catholicism opposed in Japan. FEEDINAND IL, emperor of Germany 1621. PHILIP IV., king of Spain. CHAELES I., king of Great Britain Ferdinand IL, designs the overthrow of Protestantism in Germany. FEEDINAND IIL, emperor of Germany 1643. LOUIS XIV., king of France. 1648. Peace of Westphalia. Charles I. beheaded. Interregnum aud Usurpation CHAELES II., king of Great Britain 1664. CHAELES x! (GUSTAVUS), king of Sweden. LEOPOLD I., emperor of Germany. 1660. Charles IL, king of Great Britain, restored. Christianity banished from Japan. 1665. CHAELES II., king of Spain. 1668. Triple alliance between England, Holland, and Sweden, against Louis XIV., king of France. Romish plolB for the revival of Popery in England. JAMES IL, king of Great Britain Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. The Glorious (English) Bevolution. WILLIAM and MART, king and queen of Great Britain. PETEE the Great, einp. of Eussia. CHAELES XL, king of Sweden PHILIP v., king of Spain 89 1608 7 1610 2 1612 7 1619 6 1625 12 1687 12 2 1649 1651 6 1657 28 1686 8 1688 9 8 1697 1700 1601. Protestants oppressed in Austria. 1604. do. do. in Hungary, (1605.) LEO XL PAUL V. ■ 1607. Jansenist controversy. "CiTHOLio League" against the Prot- estants. Episcopacy in Scotland. 1614 St Peter's Church in Rome com- pleted. (1621.) GEEGOET XV. (1628.) UEBAN VIIL Episcopacy unpopular in Scotland. 1627. Continuation of the Eeligions Wars in France. 1640. The Long Parliament in England. The Jansenist controversy renewed. 1642. Suppressed. 1650. Again revived. (1644.) INNOCENT X. Popular religions tnmults in Scotland. (1665.) ALEXANDER VIL 1662. Act of Uniformity in England. 2000 non-conforming ministers ejected. 1665. The Plague in London. (166T.) CLElSlNT IX (1670.) CLEMENT X. (1616.) INNOCENT XL 0689.) ALEXANDEE VIIL James II., of England, a Romanist (1691.) INNOCENT XIL (1700.) CLEMENT XL OF THE CHRISTIAN" DISPENSATION. 209 DOCTKINES & COEHUPTIONS, Beligious Ceremonies, etc. COtriTCILS. E.EMABKABLE PBESOITS. ISQtnsrnoN— ninety-one Flagclliuits burnt Wickliffites persecuted in Kngland. CommU' nlon in both l^inds. War of tlie Hussites, 1181. Feast of tbo Immaculate Conception. 1457. Moravians. 146T. Suffer cruel persecu- tion, which lasts for many years. 1473. In England, various persons burnt for heresy. 1479. Further precursors of the ISeformation- John Burchard, of Wesel. 14S0. Establishment of the Jnquitiition > Spain, First Auto-da-Fe. 14Sa LUTHEE born. 1421. Prague. 1428. Pavia, Sienna, Trevei, 1429. Biga, Tortoaa. 1430. Asehafenlurg. 1481. Nantes. Council of BASLE meets. ElQIlTKKNTU GbheBAI. ConNCIL. 1438. Ferrara. 1439. Morenoe. 1440. Bimrges. 1446. Rouen. 1448. Angers. 1449. Lausanne. 1450. Constantinople. 1452. Cologne, Magdeburg. 1455. Soissons, 1457. Avignon. 1473. Madrid, Toledo. 14S5. Seiis. 1490. Salzburg. 1492. Moscow. 1494. Nitra, Hungary. 1424. Joan of Arc. (1431.) EUGENIDS lY. (1447.) NICHOLAS T. (1450.) CALIXTU8 HI. (1458.) PIUS II. (1464.iPAUL II. 1467. Erasmus. (1471.) SIXTUS IT. (14S4.) INNOCENT VIII. (1492.) ALEXANDER TL PERIOD. CENTURY. 1501. Martin Luther entere the university of Erfurt 1503. 200 places of Moravian worship. 1506. Building of 8t. Petke's Churoh, at "Eome, begun. The doctrine of JustiJicaUon by Fmth alone,, begins to come into operation. 1510. Lather in Borne. The Oouncila in this century were — 1508. Moseow. 1510. Orleans, Tours. 1511. PISA, transferred to Milan, thence to Zyons. 1512. LATER AF^ against the Oonncil of Pisa. (1508.) PIUS IIL JULIUS ii: (1518.) LEO X. EEFOEMATION. 1517. Luther against Tbtzkl. Publishes his Mnety-fioe Theses. 15ia MELANCTHON. Luther cited. 1620. Bull against Luther and his writings. 1521. Lnther before the Diet of Worms. His German translation of the Bible. 1532. CALYIN. 1523. Poms, Bourgee, Lyons. 1586. Cologne. 1545. First Session of the Council of TRENT. The Last Gknebal Counoxl. (1622.) ADEIAN VL (1528.) CLEMENT VIL (1534.) PAUL IIL histoeY of the eyangelical ohueches. LUTHEKAIT AND EEPOKMED CHURCHES. SEPARATE BBLIGIOITS COMMUNITIES, eto. 1632. JOHN KNOX. 1665. John Rogers, Latimer, Eidley, Hooper, and Cranmer burnt. 1561. Lutheran controversy with Flacius. 1662. Jewel's Apology. BsLGio Confession. HEmKLBBEG Catechism. 1668. The Keformation completed in England. 1666. Hblvbtig Confession. 1570. Consent of Faith at Sendomlr, between the Evangelical, Eeformed, and Bohemian brethren. Lutheran Crypto-Calvinistio controversy. 1676. BookofTorgau. 1577. Presbyterians prevail in Scotland. 1680. FoEU OF CoNCOBD published. The Lutheran Flacian controversy runs high in Germany. 1581. Else of the Independents or Congregationalists. 1689. English Pitsitanb. 1590. Supralapsarians. Infralapsarians. 1692. Crypto-Calvinistic controversy suppressed in the Lutheran Church. 1600. Eise of the Arminlan controversy in Amsterdam. 1561. Mennonites, Anabaptists. 1666. Unitarians. 1671. Famlllsts in England. 1578. Faustus Socinus in Transylvania. CENTURY. 1605. Flacian controversy continued in various parts of Germany. , , t, 1608. " EvANGKLiOAt TJnion" OF GERMAN Protbstants. Fiist Baptist Church lu Eng. 1609. Public conference between Arininius and Gomaris. Spread of Arminianlsm. 1610. Independents in Holland. 1611. Present authorized English Translation of the Bible printed. 1615. The Eeformed (or Calvinian) tenets supplant those of the Evangelical (or Lutheran) in many parts of Germany. 1618. Commencement of the Thirty Years' War by the Bohemian Protestants. 1618,1619. Synod OF Dokt. 1621. The "Evangelical Union" dissolved. JOHN ELLIOT. 1622. Aeminian Confession, composed by Episcopius. Lutherans driven from Bohemia. 1627. Protestants persecuted in Bohemia and Moravia. . t . , 1631. Conferences between divisions of the Lutberaji and Eeformed Churches at Leipsic. 1683. Flourishing state of the English Baptists j and 1684, of the Eeformed Ch. in France. 1639. Eise of the Syncretistic controversy In the Lutheran Ohnrch. 1640. Archbishop LAUD. ■ . „ „ _„„„_ 1641. MassacreofProtestantsinlreland. Episcopacy overthrown in Eng. Abp. USHEK. 1643. Crisp's Works. Antinomian controversy. 1646. Baptist Confession of Faith, in London. 1647. Wjstminster Confession. 1648. End of the Thirty Years' War. 1649. Society of Friends, or Quakers. 1650. The Cartesian Philosophy injurlons to the doctrine of the Eeformed Church. Baptist controversy in England, from 1649 to 1875. 1658. Declaration of the Faith and Order of the Congregational Churches in England. 1662. Galamy and Baxter imprisoned. 1661 Quakers persecuted under the Conventlcal Act 1666. Violent persecution of the Waldensos. 1666. P. J. Spener, Lutheran Eeformer. 1675. His "Pla Desideria." 1 676. Barclay's (Quaker) Apology. „ , . . „ .., v i 1689. The Calvlnistio Baptists In Lctidon agree upon a Confession of Faith by a general assembly. Else of tho Pietistic controversy. 1601. Eudolf II. expels the Anabaptists fl:om Austria. 1620. Flourishing period of Socinianlsm in Po- land, and of Unltarianism in Transylvania. 1646. Anabaptlsii. Antinomians. Famlllsts. Fifth-Monarchy Men, in England. Deism In England. Hobbes. 1668. Edict against t]ie Soclnians in Poland. They become incorporated with the Unita- rians in Transylvania. 1669, Labbadlsts, at Amsterdam. 1690. Antinomian controversy, revived in Eng- land. 1700. The Camisards (Fanatics) in Cevenne*, etc. 210 STNCHEONIOAL CHRONOLOGY A. K HISTOBY OF THE CHtTECH, Internal and External. Trs. A. D. POPES, etc. EiaHTEENTH 6826 8837 5852 5862 586T S382 5887 5899 S903 5910 5912 6914 5916 5927 1701. FEEDEEICK I., king of Prussia. ANNE, queen of Great Britain JOSEPH I., emperor of Germany. 1707. Union of England and Scotland. LOUIS XV., Iving of France 1724. C!47'aiJJmE', empress of Eussia. GEORGE II., king of Great Britain , 1727. PETEK II., emperor of Russia. CHKISTIAN TI., king of Denmark 17-30. ANNE IWANOWNA, empress of Russia. MARIA THERESA, empress of Germany. 1740. FliEDEEICK II., tlie Great, k. of Prussia. IVAN, emp. of Eussia. 1741. ELIZABETH, empress of Russia. CHARLES VII., emperor of Germany France declares war against England, Austria, and Holland. FRANCIS I. (consort of Maria Theresa), emperor of Germany 1746. FERDINAND IV., k. of Spain. FEEDEEICK V., k. of Denmark. 1751. AUGUSTUS FREDERICK, king of Sweden. WILLIAM v., stadtholder of Holland. 1759. CHARLES III., king of Spain. GEORGE III., king of Great Britain 1762. PETER IIL, emperor of Russia. Then CATHARINE II. JOSEPH II.. emperor of Germany (with Maria Theresa) 1766. CHRISTIAN VIL, king of Denmark. Partition of Pohmd by Austria, Russia, and Prussia. LOUIS XVI., king of France 1776. United States op Amkbioa independent of Great Britain. MARIA I., queen of Portugal FREDERICK WILLIAM II., king of Prussia. CHARLES IV., king of Spain....: 1789. Constitution of the United States adopted. GEO. WASHINGTON. 1st president LEOPOLD II., emperor of Germany FRANCIS II., emperor of Germany 1792. AUGUSTUS ADOLPUUS IV., king of Sweden. Robespierre. Reigh of Tkkkoe. Louis XVI., of France, beheaded. Pa. pal dominion overthrown. End of the 1260 days, or years, of San, vii. 26, etc. LOUIS XVIIL, king of France. (Death of Louis XVIL) 1796. PAUL I., emperor of Russia. FEEDEEICK WILLIAM III., king of Prussia 1797. JOHN ADAMS, 2d president of the United Slates. Union of Great Britain and Ireland 2 2 1702 1704 11 1716 12 1727 3 1730 10 1740 2 1742 8 1745 15 1760 6 1765 9 1774 S 9 2 1777 1786 17S8 2 2 1790 1792 1795 1797 1800 A Christian Church (Roman Catholic) in the palace of the Emperor of China, at Pekin. The Emperor of Russia, head of the Greek Church in his dominions. 1708. 700 Franciscan Monasteries. (1721.) INNOCENT XIII. (1724.) BENEDICJT XIIL 1728. Canonization of Gregory TIIL 11730.) CLEMENT XIL (1740.) BENEDICT XIT. 1756. War declared between England and France. (1768.) CLEMENT XIIL (1769.) CLEMENT XIV. 1778. Order of Jesuits suppressed. (1775.) PIUS VL 1775. Concession made by the British Government to Roman Catholics. 1787. Beginning ot the French Beyola tion. Fresh concessions made by the British Government to Roman Catholics. (1800.) PIUS VIL NINETEENTH 5946 5950 5952 5977 5981 5985 1801. THOMAS JEFFERSON, Sd president of the United States. ALEXANDER I., emperor of Russia. 1802. Bonaparte. New French Constitution. BONAPARTE, emperor of France 1806. Erection of New Kingdoms by Bonaparte. FERDINAND VII., king of Spain. Joseph Bonaparte 1809. CHARLES XIIL, king of Sweden. JAMES MADISON, 4th president of the United States. 1812. War between Great Britain and the United States. Abdication of Bonaparte. LOUIS XVIIL, king of France. Peace of Paris between the Allies and France. 1817. JAMES MONROE, 6th president of the United States. CHARLES JOHN, king of Sweden GEOEGE IV., kin» ot Great Britain 1821. CHARLES X., king of France. 1825. JOHN QUINCT ADAMS, 6th president of the United States. 1829. ANDEEW JACKSON, 7th president WILLIAM 1V„ king of Great Britain 1880. LOUIS PHILIPPE, king of the French. 1831. LEOPOLD L, king of the Belgians. OTHO, king of Greece. VICTORIA, queen of Great Britain. The reigning queen 1887. MAETIN VAN BUEEN, 8th president of the United States. 1841. HARRISON and TYLER, 9th and 10th presidents. JAMES K POLK, 11th president TAYLOR and FILLMORE, 12th and 13th presidents FRANKLIN PIERCE, 14th president JAMES HUCHANAN, 15th president Celebration occasioned by the Laying op the Gbeat Atlajitig Cable. 1 1801 3 1804 4 1808 6 1814 4 2 1818 1820 10 1880 7 1837 8 4 4 4 1 1S45 1849 1853 1«57 1858 108. War between Great Britain and France, and between Great Britain and Holland. 1806. Strenuous efforts to maintain Pon- tifical dignity and power. Treaty of Ghent, between Great Britain and the United States. (1323.) LEO XIL (1829.) PIUS VIIL (1881.) GREGORY XVL Revolution in France and Belgium. (1846.) PIUS IX. The reigning Pontiff. o * ^y *li6 addition of 10 years to the last date In the column, a. m. 5990, it -will give the sum total of 6000 years from the creation and fall of man. A like result is obtained by the addition of 10 years, together with the year of the Nativity, 4132, to the last date in. the column, a. d. 1858, namely, 6000 years. OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION. 211 LUTHEKAN AND EEFOKMBD CHUEOHES. SBPAEATB EELIGIOUa COMMUNITIBB, etc. CENTURY, 1701. Through the laljors of Spener, Eranke, and others, the Missionary zeal of the Bvangeiical (Luthcraiij Church receives a new impulse. Baptist Catechism. SooiETT FOB TUB Fkupaoatiok OF THE GosPEL IN FoBBiGM Pauts, is founded in England. 1703. Fruitless efforts in Prussia to unite the Reformed and Evangelical Churches, 1704 The School of Spener begins to degenerate. 1712. Gale against Wall, on Infant Baptism. 1717. The Bangoriau controversy begins. Uoadly denies the divine institution of Episcopacy. 1727. Church of the United Brethren at Berthholsdorf. Count Zinzeudor£ Hutchin- sonians in England. 1751. WESLEYS— John and Charles. WHITEFIELD. Origin of the Scottish Seces- sion Church. 1786. Amalgamation of Theological Parties in Germany, which prepares the vray for the introduction of A false philosophy, opposed to all former theological systems, 173S. Whitefield In America. Methodist Society formed in London. 1747. Burghers and Antl-Burghers in Scotland. 1748. Isaac "Watts. 1752. Christian Fred. Schwartz. Origin of the Kelief Church in Scotland. 1755. Fseudo-Eationalism in Germany. 1757. First Baptist Church in Scotland. In 1836 they amounted to 50. 1766. The Methodists numerous in America. 1776. Independent Congregations in England alone, 1509. 1788. Calvinistio Methodists in Wales become numerous. 1792. Baptist Missionary Society for the East and West Indies founded, and has been continued with great success to the present time. 1798. Temporary suppression of the public profession of Christianity in France. David Hume, a skeptical writer (England), Lord H. Bolinbroke, a deistlcal writer (Eng.) Thomas Chubb, a deistlcal writer (England). 1708. Peter Bayle, a skeptical writer. 1712. Whiston, professor of mathematics, at Cambridge — Avian. Dr. Samuel C\BXk~8&m.i-Ariam. 1713. A. Ashley Cooper, earl of Shaftesbury, a deistlcal writer. 1719. Toland advocates the system of Spinoza. 1724. Bunkers, near Philadelphia. 1780. Tindal writes against the Christian reli- gion (England). Origin of the Glassites, or Sandimanians. 1741. Thomas Morgan, a doistical writer (Eng.) 1750. Swedenborgians. 1759. Pernicious influence of Socinianism in Geneva. 1795. LoNDOir Missionabt Society fokmed. 1800. English Chuboh Missionahy Sooiett forubd. 1770. Shakers. 1780. Unlversalists in America. 1787. " The Church of the New Jeiusalem"- Swedenborgian. 1793. Thomas Paine publishes his "Age of Reason." 1796. Theophilanthropists in France. CENTURY. J. Priestly, Unitarian (England). 1803, The Methodists very numerous in England and elsewhere. 1804. The Bsitibh abd Fokeign Bible Society founded. 1808. Society for the Conversion of the Jews established in London. 1809. Great Ameeioan Missiosakt Society founded in Boston. 1810. The Eeformed Presbyterian Synod of Scotland. 1814. English Methodist Missionary Society founded. American Baptist do. do. do. 1816. Evangelical Missionary Society founded at Basle. 1817. United Missionary Society founded at New York. Mournful prevalence of Infldellty at G eneva. Unios of the Luthbean and Eeformbd Chtteches in Pefssia. 1819. American Methodist Missionary Society established. . xt _.v a ;20. Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Cbdech in North America founded. 1881. Partial revival of Evangelical Christianity at Geneva. The present state of the Protestant Evangelical Churches throughout the world, calls for our sympathy and our prayers; and the insidious influence of unbridled supersti- Hon, on the one hand, and the no less pernicious effect of false philosophy and the pride of human reason on the other, should admonish us that The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the' EeUgion of Protestants. 1887. Some remains of the Oriental Sects, or Christian Communities, exist to the present day, without having been merged in the Church of Bome. These are— I. The Neatorian, or Clialdean ChriMana, settled on the coast of Malabar. II. Monopho»ites ; namely: 1. Syrian Jacobites^ under a Patriarch of Antioch. 2. Copts, in Egypt, under a Patriarch of Alexandria. 8. Armenia/ns, under their own Catholicos, resident in Persia. 4. Abyatvnian^, under a head subordinate to the Coptic Patriarch. III. Monottielites, i. e. the Maronites of Mount Lebanon, retain considerable independence, though nominally united to the Eomish Church. 212 SACKED GENEALOGICAL TABLES, FROM ADAM TO CHRIST. H CO w Q O H O CO pq <1 H Q O i S5" -5^ 5— =■ ^ g£.S J <) i?5 l^tSta bd •■ m s ja -N i J3 J3 ^ ?a js J3 M •S*" Ji 1^ n 220 SACRED GENEALOGICAL TABLES, FROM ADAM TO CHRIST. 3cS ^-i bo ?^ l!! X -SS «;« mSQ ^•7. I33 g« 2 f^ X •3 ^■«' P4 Pi: J OQ ^ X §1 00 X ^ M d SS X T-l I3 n ■ftCj t» •^^ r^ r^ ~OQ0 -< 3 -CQ 'S'4 0! g§ -See _/ d! W .. ^- c " M ts_g a p- a-i ^ «,-( 1..31 *^ ^ w-^- ^ fi'^ js-a-* -5i P4 S -J — S W ^ l2 " -3 3 I .3 §■ ^ I 01 " ^1 J3g I-! P SJ^ a ?Sf i ^ S i3 H^§ IZi ■1g4 r ^ . ■g < n ,^ ■5^ riS Seo -1^'^ |5" iq ^'^ iSs r-l iH 1-t --I ,f£ .w ■s .» -^ J3 JS -•O x^ w I. a w ^1 oS 1^' 1 , >^ H aa CO H X P5 ^ M g o u ■< ■ (4 )g i» Q D ■Bfa B GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. 221 O H w O < o Ph o H Q o <1 C5 is s o 5? f*» M 3— e^^— a I s I I *5 -C-H ^ P •go u J -a o 01 •8 G) a S pi -^i -g !2! O Mi .c'— s — a—' B CM S~.2" -o. — o it H. 5 ag -a-s 5 Eh 222 GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PEOFANB ANCIENT HISTORY. M a M •8 .9 c". W H ■< (.- «s S o !=!.£• 31 o d.'S e- M.S tJ h:§-< g § • fc n *1 CO B l^« P5 «( xi< ^-^ I M M m •re 2; >»J (N <** « t-S ^ Pi ■n O eg -( -a S ^ • CL. ►*! ^-' w CD T-t T-1 r-1 T~1 t~i r^ r^ a CS3 & a^ygJs.gid.aS-aiafflSal 5 i3 1-; oo i-i " § I Q O S g S o 1 5 M t3 g « f^ ■til irf C4 C4 S ffiS CD t— (5 M CO s'lricJ /' . » «• h' ej & (Md GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. 223 5 i ft; a to ^ o p B r a fH 6 W P ^ 5 .n as P 5 s ■s H a 1 o o S o" M fi rri ^ a t3 m •^^ >- •s-i g w -^ hq « N QJ o Ew to"15 «" § i »- ^ tij >• d o -a ^ ■g ut s ^ K Pi o p n ■s -=) •d a ^ mIi § s^ . g P4 ■^ ^ g « us ti S^ ?? ^ & ^ s t-i t2i a tT fi 5 C3 CD O tl M* F^ ^ i o o E-i IZl -) 224: GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PBOFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. r 1 a g i ^ •I'O i as g •y P w >; M rl^ ^« o p4 C4 I I GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. 225 •3-i •9 £: I 3 n r-l 10 5 s S| o n IZi o S l-l 15 s -^ I ^1 1 = 1 e a E 13 E-i -p- 5 -o- a ^p O <( ^ |S5 i^ -5 scB ■J I CO W M ->) H o 1 226 GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. S ■2 ^ & -4^ ^ II "■^ ja w H _, (i :r.56 'J5 tt 5fl ?il-^ ..T d l-H Si » nest Aug . of Hano jrge Fred fi« * «^. If OS SSca • S -s-s '^R ■^•R s*P CS-, CS ■i -i R §- O 0^ o la Si ^ w e g !^ 2 SSI^ ■§ sis ^■■g-gl M M » u M H M H « M -w— W P4 P4 Pq fH Is s; -a J H H W C6 S O M M « O o o , . w O—IS -^ § § o p m 2 c4 o5 Eh P4 e Is il p4 fc Is-. .0 M — O *-5- , s« s^ I fi £ I!. t. c « e s 2 •2 -'2 •3 t^ £ d •a , s « ri B rf W « M fi ^ ■2 S E- . J -J s o a 1= O fan ^M a 41'-' 4, ■c "a s n 'S S ^ p £ ■§=a ll 3 112 SB'S S 'C 2 GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. 227 P ■4 ■c P4 P P4 a ■a S! a s s a a r I d a K P IC O 03 ■ s P4 -S Hi 9 ^ M W 1^1 n •A of P4 § 1-3 •n o g p; o o Hi a •S 'ft: J I .Q *-• CO*o Ma O M ti 7 Is" lp it) I I P4 o rs CO O o Hit- ..a I" 9.'E-< So ^|. i-ig in - Hia ^ PS ^ . S o H-t g.2 ss < ■1 6,a §1 1 L°^ -!5 W /- . 2^ £3 It 3 03^ S P°S PS §11 SO? V.' 1-1 £ (^ 1^-5 6 S 23 5. 5 g^ (0 M s - g O 00 lA o %^ & c 3 *£ "o •«• S K^ 3 ;s CI 0.rri x: n PM ■ c3 > Eh O o m a o in IZi o a M -^ en HI Km 1^ I cdhJ Ci2 Wo OhI i w I ^' ^ t-S ■S S t3 o H GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTOET. GENEALOGICAL TABLES OF PROFANE ANCIENT HISTOBT. 229 S SB's' S § i -• w ■§ i H "3 S SSBi H hi (H o o no n i-t M a ^ □Q 3 •3 . 4^ a tj M •S « £ H ^ S S £ o g Si &> a -S M g <3 s 6M to . 1 5s PS 1 n Its •g° .a y gSwg WHO jW . ri s I i I r-4 rH 230 GENEALOGICAL TABL'ES OF PBOFANE ANCIENT HISTORY. CD Q CO i-i " ■4 Eh ►J . o -^ I r 5 3 ?M >^ si- o W H O I. o fe;W Si bfei CO t-t CD o O o o CD H W o M B S M S Cd bH [33 )-H a S H <^ S S M S « « w ?i O N D N ^ t- t^ ^ M ^ M M S M O " w a S M B M s S« M «s tn "i s H w s iJ- -kJO H "^r- ■< :^-° M tn ri o« i-:S' T-l M P W B N s I-i Ei W~l rzi g 9 ^- 1 D p cS c6 (H CQ o£ *d1 1-1 . _g St! & 2 = <1 MR M i f3 to "O 1 « J h d <\i ^ *! .£4 a Ph CQ 02 •^ s « ■o e =g ^S m- is INDEX. Abomination, the, that maketh defiolato — meaning of, 111, Acts xlii. 17-22, compared with 1 Kings vi. 1, 93-96. Acts xvli. 26, etc, Mr. Gliddon on— fallacy of, 60. Adam, book of the generation of, IT. Alphabet, Egyptian— Mr. Gliddon on, 20-24. Antichrist, the great Jewish — Moses Stuart on— fallacy of, 110-111. Antiochus Epiphanes, Moses Stuart and Josephus on. 111, Artapanes, au Egyptian philosopher, 31. Assyria, historical remarks on, 99, 100. Angustine renounces the'Septuagint Chronology, 56, 57. B. Babylon, historical remarks on, 99. Bajoces, a persecutor of the Jews, 111. Bear. See nnder beasts. Beast, the symbolioal nondescript of Daniel's first vision, 123-127. Beast, the nnmber o^ 666, 179, 180. Beast, frontlet of the papal, contains the number 666, ISO. Beasts of Daniel viL 1-8. The symbolical lion, bear, leopard, and nondesoript, 120, 121 ; the ram and he-goat, Dan. Till., 121-123. Bernardo de Bossi, G., investigator of the Hebrew text, 58. Erixianus, a Hebraist, 23. Buxtorfs, the, Hebraists, 28. c. Cabalas, the ancient, of heathen writers, proof of their derivation, by tradition, fi'om the Hebrews, 63-65. Canaan, Palestine, or the Holy Land— historical remarks on, 101, 102. Captivities, the three, of the Jews, 115, 116. Chaldeans, their annals traditionary— their astronomy older than that of the Egyptians — their mode of calculating the degrees of equinoctial precession, 35, 86. Chaldee, the, a dialect of the Hebrew— quoted by the prophets, 19. Champolllon School, their theory of interpreting Egyptian hiero- glyphics fallacious— Dr. Scyffarth on, 22-24 Chronologists, Scriptural, the mischievous tendency of their dif- ferences, 16. Chronology, definition of— aacred and profane— historic and pro- . phetic — data of— variations of the three versions, 11, 12. Chronology, alleged obscurity of— its fiillacy demonstrated, 12. Chronology, sacred— proof of the corruption of the Hebrew text — 1. By the Egyptians, 82. 2. By the or^{na2 Samaritans, 40, 41. 3. 4. By the Jews, in the numerical Roman and Alexan- drine copies of the Septuaglnt, 41-43. 5. By the SetlenisiUs Samaritans, 48, 44. 6. Traditional numbers, 44, 45. 7. By the Clementine numbers, 44, 45. 8. By the modern Jews, 45-47. Chronology, criterion for the measurement of sacred time — har- monized with the solar year— old as the time of Moses, 82-35. Clarke, Dr. Adam, on the name, "the Latin Kingdom," applied to papd Borne, as denotive of the number 666, 181. Clementine corruptions of the Hebrew text, 45. Coptic, the language of anciwt Egypt, etc., 23. Copts, the descendants of the ancient Egyptians, 28. Corruptions, chronological, of the Hebrew Scriptures, 86-58, Cycles and eras, early origin of, 85 D. Days, the 1260, Prof. Stuart on, 109-111. Days, the 1260, when they begin and end— application of literal time to— fallacy of— Mr. Faber's theory of— examined— proof that they commenced A. v. 688, and ended a. d. 1793, 173-177. Days, the 1290, Prof. Stnart on, 109-111. Days, the 1290, when they begin and end, 177, 178. Days, the 1290 and 1335, Prof. Stuart on, 109-111. Days, the 1290 and 1335, Mr. Faber on Dan. xii. 12, 18— fallacy of, ITS, 179. Days, the 2800, alleged different readings, 152 ; Prof. Stuart on, re- ply, 152, 153 ; when they begin and end— Sir Isaac Newton, Mr. Ouninghame, Mr. Faber, and Mr. D. N. Lord on— replies, 163- 16T. Decrees, four, of Persian monarchs, in reference to Dan. ix. 24-2T -Mr. Gliddon on— refuted, 96-99. Demotic or euchorial character — derivation of, 22. "Desolate, the abomination that maketh" — meaning of, 111. Diagram of contemporaneous patriarchs, 26. Difficulties, chronological — source of, 15; alleged to be insuperable —groundlessness ot, 86, 87 ; of the fathers of the first four cen- turies regarding the prophetical numbers — reply, 112, 118. Diogenes, a quotation from, 12, Discrepancies, chronological — their true source, etc., 12. Dispersion, the, of the descendants of Noah (see map), 13. E. Egypt, its alleged superior antiquity over all other nations— fallacy of, 20, 24 Egyptian alphabet, Mr. Gliddon on — its alleged antediluvian origin by revelation — fallacy of, 20-24. Egyptian hieroglyphics, alleged derivation of the Hebrew square character from^Jallacy of, 20, 24. Egyptian monumental remains, the alleged chronology of, com- pared with the Hebrew version, 66-Tl. Egyptians preceded by the Chaldeans, in the order of time, 86. Egyptians, Hebrew origin of their astronomical calculations, 86. Egyptians borrowed their degree of 100 years of equinoctial pre- cession from the Babylonians, 3T. Egyptians, their zodiac, etc., 36. Egyptians, the zodiacal period of 86, 525 years, etc., 3T, 38. Eliphaz, the, of Gen, xxxvi. 4, 10, and Ghron. i. 35, a contemporary with Job, IT. Equinoctial precession, of 17^ years to a degree, how formed, 36. Equinoctial precession, the Greek, Sir Isaac Newton on, 86. Equinoctial precession, rules for determining the true and the false, 39, 40. Errors, in the chronology of the Septuagint and Hebrew versions compared, 8T, 83. Ethnic chorograph of Gen. x., 60. Euphrates, the mystical, denotive of the Mohammedan or Turkish power— when and how It is to he destroyed, 1T2, ITS. Eusebius on the Samaritan version, 18. Eusebius' Chronology, 47, 43. 232 INDEX. Fathers, the early, except Orlgcn and Jerome, not IIcbralBta, 56, G. Galatlne, Peter, a Hebraist, 28. Gliddon, Mr. G-. E., his alleged derivation of the Hebrew square character from Egyptian hieroglyphics, examined and refuted, 20-24 ; his theory against the chronology of Scripture examined and refuted, 57-62 ; his alleged chroii61ogy of ancient Egyptian monumental remains, against that of the Hebrew version, ex- amined and refuted, 66-71 ; a further refutation of his theory, 96-99. Greece, historical remarks on, 103, 104. Halea', Dr., chronology, 48; Mr. Gliddon on, 59. Hebrew square character— primiti.ve origin oi^ etc., 16-18. Hebrew MSS., materials of— perfection of— care of the Jews in their preservation ; alleged precedence of the Samaritan letter — fallacy of, 13, 19; alleged derivation of from the Egyptian hiero- glyphics — fallacious, 20-24. Hebrew version, its alleged spuriousness—Cuninghame — Drr Scyf- farth, 15, 16. Hebrew and Septuagint versions compared— New Testament quo- t.itions firom the Old Testament, by Christ and his apostles— a table of, 27. Hebrew Scriptures, the fountain-head of revelation— their uninter- rupted transmission— various editions of, 24-28. Hebrew numbers, the shorter, direct proof of the claims of, over the expanded chronology of the Septuagint, 76-79. He-goat See under beasts. Hermaic records, date o^ 32. Hermes Trismegistus, copyist of the Egyptian Genesis — a contem- porary with Moses, 31. Hieratic character, derivation of, 23. Hieroglyphics, Egyptian — the word defined- interprelation of— ab- surdity of the symbolic theory of, 22, 23. History, definition of, 11. History, sacred, corrupted by the Egyptians, 32. History, its relation to prophecy, 14, 222. Historians, ancient profane— their extravagant claims to a remote antiquity— ftillacy of, 62-65. Holy Land, historical remarks on, 101, 102. Hopkins, Bishop, of Vermont, on the "seven times" of Lev. xxvi., 133. "Horn, the little," of Dan. vii. 8, 24, 124,125; his character de- scribed, 154, 156. "Horn, the little," of Dan. viiL 8-12; 28-25, 121-128. Horns, the two little, of Dan. vil. and viii.— proof by five argu- ments that they are not Identical, 158, 163. " Hour, day, month, and year," of Kev. is. 14, 15, an Integral part of the 2800 days, etc. , 170-173. I. Ignorance during the apostolic age, of " the times and seasons" — how to be accounted for, 113, 115. Image, the colossal, of Nebuchadnezzar'*B vision— proof that It now stands entire In all its parts, 128, 129. Intercalations, necessity oi^ to harmonize sacred and solar time, 84,85. Issachar, the children of, "who had understanding of the times," etc., 33. Jarvis, the late Eev. Dr., on the "seven times," 138. Jerome on the Samaritan version, 18. Jerome and Origen as Hebraists, 56. Jewish corrnptloDS of the Hebrew text, 40-53. Jews, their three captivities — are delivered up to the domlnancy over them of the four Gentile powers, 115, 116. Job, lived before the time of Hosos— quotations, from the book of, 17. Joaephus' chronology— table, 47, 48. Josephus on the 1260 days, etc., 111,. Kennicott's collation of the Hebrew text, 68. Kirjath-Sephu, the city of letters, 17. L. Lamb, Dr. John, on the alleged derivation of the Hebrew square letter from Egyptian hieroglyphics— fallacy of, 21-24. Languages, all of every ancient nation derived from the ori^nal Hebrew, 23. " Latin Kingdom, the," name of, contains the mystical number of 666, 181. Leopard. See nnder beast. Letters and writing, art of, of antediluvian origin, etc., 16-18. Links, chronological, summary of, 86-105. Lion. See under beasts. "Little horn," the, of Dan. vilL 8-12, history o^ 121-123; 12&- 168. "Little horn," the, of Dan. vli. 8, 24^ history of, 124, 125 ; 154-163. Lord, Mr. D. N. on the "seven times," 137. M. Magicians, Egyptian, their love of national pre-eminence, 32. Maitland, Eev. S. E., of England, on prophetical time, a literalist, 109. Manetho's Sethos, in three books, 31, Materials used for the original Hebrew MSS., IS, 19. Medo-Fersia, historical remarks on, 103. Mesopotamia, or Syria, historical remarks on, 100, 101. Modern Jewish corruptions of the Hebrew text, 45-47. Mohammedan "little horn," etc., 121-128. "Months, the five," of Eev. ix. 5, 10, an integral part of the 2300 days of Dan. viii. 14, 167-170. Monuments of Egypt, Mr. Gliddon's theory of— refuted, 66-71. Moses, author of the Pentateuch — a contemporary with the Egyp- tian Hermes Trismegistus, 31. Munster, a Hebraist, 28. Mystery, the word, inscribed on the front of the Pope's mitre, 180. National Providence, Scriptural account of, 18. Nations, the divisions of, in the earth (see map), 18, 14. Newton, Sir Isaac, on the computation of the eqain. precession, 86. Nondescript beast — his history, etc., 123-129. Notes, from 1 to 88, on the details of "Our Bible Chronology," 89- 105. o. Obscurity of the prophetical numbers considered and explained,, 111-114. Objections, seven, to the account given in this work of the corrup- tions of the Hebrew chronology, with replies, 54-62. Origen and Jerome as Hebraists, 56. Pagninus, a Hebraist, 28. Palestine, historical remarks on, 101, 102. Papal "little horn," the, history of, 153-163. Pentateuch, Moses the author of— written on the plains of Midlan — its priority to the Egyptian Genesis of Hermes Trismegistus, 81, 82. Feyrera, Isaac de la, a Pre- Adamite, 61. Phoenicia, historical remarks on, 101, 103. Ficus, John, of Mirandola, revives Hebrew learning in Christen- dom, 28. Planetary configurations, Egyptian— Dr. Scyffarth's theory of— ex amined and refuted, 71-75. Fre-Adamile theory, adopted by Mr. Gliddon- fallacy of, 61, 62. Prophecies, Scriptural account of those which relate to the four great Gentile monarchies— the Babylonian, Medo-Ferslan, Gre- cian, and Eoman, 115-129. prophecies, objection, that they cannot be understood until fulfilled —reply to, 130, 181. Prophetic chronology— conflicting opinions regarding It, 106. INDEX. 233 Froptaetio events without dates, 106, 107. Prophetlo events with dates in common time, lOT. Prophetic events in mystical time, lOT, 108. Prophetlo computations of time— the year-day system, 108, 109 ; the literal theory — Professor Stuart on, 109-111. Prophetical numbers— on their continued obscurity, etc., Ill, 112. Prophets, the sixteen, historical remarks on, 104, 103. Propositions, three, on which this work Is founded, 12, Providence, national. Scriptural doctrine of, 13. Ptolemy Phllopater, a persecutor of the Jews, 111. E. Bam. See under beasts. Eeplies, seven, to objections against our account of the mode of corrupting the Hebrew chronology, 54-62. Eesponaibllity of corrupting the chronology of Scripture — where it rests, 15, 16, 46. Beuchlin, a Hebraist, 28 ^ Soman, numerical, corruption of the Hebrew text, 41-48. Boman, Alexandrine, corruption of the Hebrew text, 41, 43. Borne, historical remarks on, 104. Eosetta Stone, 22. Eule, for computing the years of generations, kings' reigns, etc., 88, 89. Eule, for Interpreting prophetical time — the year-day and literal theories. 108, 111. Babbatism, the great Millennial, to follow the close of the present age, 182, 183. Samaritan Pentateuch, origin of, 28, 29. Samaritan letters, their alleged precedence as to time over the He- brew square character— fallacy of, 18-20. Samaritan and Hebrew characters compared, 19. Samaritan original corruption of the Hebrew text, 40, 41. Samaritan BeUenistio corruption of the Hebrew text, 48, 44. Samaritans, their history, 28, 29. Banchoniathou's Ciosmogony, etc.— the most ancient profane writing extant, 81. Scriptures, the Hebrew, corrupted by the Samaritans and Jews, 88-58. Satanic device, masterpiece of, 15. Bcyffarth, Dr., an Egyptologist and Septuagintorian— quotations Uom, 16, 20, 22, 28, 24, 86, ST, 54, 56, 5T, 58, 71-75, 82-86, 88. Scyffarth's, Dr., theory of Egyptian planetary conflgnrations, ex- amined and refuted, 71-75. Seal of Daniel's visions broken, 112. Semitic race, the, subordination to, of other nations, 14. Septuagint, the Greek, a translation from the original Hebrew, 16. Septuagint quoted by Christ and his apostlos, 27. Septuagint version, history of, 29, 80. Septuagint chronology, renounced by Augustine, 56, 57. "Seven times," the mystical number of Moses, Lev. xxvi.— expo- sition of, 129-136. Seven times," the mystical number of Daniel, Dan. Iv.— exposi- tion of, 136-189. "Seven times," Mr. Faber's theory of— its fallacy, 132, 133. "Seven times," the Eev. Mr. Winthrop, Dr. Jarvis, and Bishop Hopkins on — replies, 138, 184 "Seven times," further evidence confirmatory of our exposition of, 145-151. "Seventy weeks" of Dan. Ix. 24-27— exposition of, 139-145. "Seventy weeks," Daniel's prophecy of the, chap. Ix. 24-27-how applied by the Jews to the coming of Messiah, 46. Six thousand years, proof of the predetermination of, etc., 79-82. Six thousand years, Dr. Scyffarth's theory of-examined and re- futed, 82-86. Solar year, harmonized with the sacred, 3^35. "Stone, the MOTOTAnf," destroys the colossal imago, etc.— time o^ 127, 128. , ., . Stuart^ Eev. Moses, on prophetical time— his theory examined, etc., 109-111. Symbols, 117-127. See also table, 192-197. Symbols, aummary of, as denotive of the mutations of the nonde- script beast, 125, 126. Syria or Mesopotamia, historical remarks on, 100, 101. Tables, chronological — 1. Tariations of, by different writers, 11, 12. 2. Tariations of the three versions, 15. 8. Of contemporaneous patriarchs, 26. 4 Of quotations from Septuagint, by Christ and his apos- tles, 27. 5. Of Jewish months, 84. 6. Of Jewish months, 85. 7. Of differences In the three versions, between the creation and delnge, 89. 8. Of differences produced by 100 years, and 71i years, to a degree of equinoctial precession, 40. 9. The same, between Hebrew and Samaritan, 41. 10. Showing the results of applying the above differences of 100 and 71J years to a degree, to the current and cor- rected Hebrew chronology, 41. 11. Illustrating the true and false degree of equinoctial pre- cession, etc., 43. 12. Another, the Hellenistic Samaritans, 43. 18. Of the judicial era of the Samaritans, 44 14. Of the traditional numbers, 44. 15. Of differences between Josephus and Clemens, 45. 16. Of the chronology of Josephus, 47. IT. Of the chronology of Eusebius, 4S. 18. Illustrating the corruptions of the Hebrew text, 50. 19. Another, 51. 20. Another, 52. 21. Another, 53. 23. Of the deluge, vocation and exode, 66. 28. Of Egyptian pyramids, 67. 24 Another, 67. 25. Of discrepancies of the three versions, Samaritan, Ho^ brew, and Greek, 76. 26. Another, 76. 27. Another, 76. 23. Another, 76. 29. Another, 76. 80. Another, 77. 81. Of the chronology of Josephus, 90. 82. Of the 215 years' sojourn In Egypt, 90. 83. Of the 5ST years between the exode and the end of Saul's reign, according to Acts xili. lT-22, 92. 34. Another, on the same period, 93. 35. From death of Moses to first servitude, 94. 36. Demonstrative of the period of anarchy, 94. 37. Specified dates of the whole period from the exode to the 4th year of Solomon, 94 83. Showing an increase of 107 years between 1 Kings vi. 1 and Acts xiii. 17-22, over this period as given by Usher, 96. 89. A summary of the prophetical dates of Daniel and the Apocalypse, 107, 151. 40. For reckoning the "time, times, and half a time," 109. 41. Of the division of the Eoman empite Into ten king- doms, 119. 42. Of the historical chronology of the Hebrew version, 129. 48. Showing the commencement and close of the "seven times," or 2520 years of Lev. xxvi. and Dan. iv., 186. 44 Showing the harmony of historic chronology with the " seoenty ■weeks,'" or 490 years of Dan. ix. 24-27, 144 45. Summary of the historic and longer proplietic dates, 145. 46. Another, 145. 47. Another, of general historic chronology, 145. 48. Of numeral letters, as formerly used by the nations of Latins, Greeks, and Hebrews, 179. 49. Of the number 666, as found in the Hebrew names, Momiith, Bomanus, and the Greek, Lateinos, 180. 50. Another, in the title of the Popes, "Vioaritts JUii del," 180. 61. Another, in the name, "the Lathi kingdom," as applied to papal Borne, 181. 52. Summary of the shorter prophetical numbers as con- nected with the historic, 182. 53. Another, 182. 64 Synchronlcal, sacred and profane, from creation to na- tivity, 184-197. 55. Synchronlcal, sacred and profane, from nativity to a. d. 1859, 198-211. 234 INDEX, 66. Genealogical, sacred, trom Adam to Christ, 212-220. 57. Genealogical, profane, ancient and modern, 221-230. Thoth, the first Hermes— sculptured tablets of the Egyptian Gene- sis, 31. Time, sacred, rule for measurement of, 82-35. " Time of the end," prophecy to be made clear, 115. " Times of the Gentiles," Luke xxi. 24, import of the phrase, 145-150. • Tradition, oral, not the only source of knowledge of the world's early- history by Moses, 16-20. Tradition, the remotest profane annals derived from, 62-65. ,, Traditional corruptions of the Hebrew text, 44, 45. " Tree, the great" symbolical, Dan. iv.— its typical import, 132-184 ; objections— replies, 136-139. Tribulation, the unparalleled, of Matt. xxiv. 21, and Mark xiii. 19— exposition of— is coincident with the close of "the times of the Gentiles," 147-151. " Types of mankind," by Dr. Nott and Mr. GUddon— examined and refuted, 20-24, 67-62, 66-Tl, 96-99. u. tJnchronological period, etc, 80, 166, 182. Usher's chronology, Mr. Gliddon on, 59. Variations of the three versions, the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Sep- tuagint— the question, which is authoritative, 15. , Versions,, the three— four characteristic differences of, 39. Versions, the Hebrew, corrupted and mutilated by the Bevent; Greek translators, 16, 16, 41-43. Versions, the three, their precedence in the order of time, 16-34. Versions, the three, the chronology of, compared, 66-71. " Vioariua jQlii Dei," contains the number 666, 180. Visions of Nebuchadnezzar, of the colossal image, 117-119 ; of the great tree, IIT, 120. Visions of Daniel, the first and second, 120, Vision of Daniel, the seal broken, 112. Vision of Daniel, a test of the Church's fideliiy in learning their significance, 112, 118. Vltalian, Pope, first ordained that worship should be performed in the Latin tongue, 81. W, Winthrop, Bey. Edward, on the "seven times," 133, 136. World, the, not governed by chance, 12, Writing, origin of, 16. Year, solar. See under solar year. Tears, the 6000, See under 600O, Zodiac, bow constracted by the Egyptians, 86. Zodiacal period, Egyptian, of 86,625 years— how rednoed to com- mon time, 87, 88,