Early

Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.
We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.
Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
journal-content.








JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.

145

Art.

and Hebrew Chronology compared, with

VII.?Assyrian
the view of showing the extent to which theHebrew chronology
of Usslier ?7iust be modified, in conformity with the Assyrian

Canon.

By

I. W.

BosANQUEr, Esq.
[Read March

7, 1864.]

It is now about two years sinco Sir II. Itawlinson published

his discovery of the Assyrian
Canon, that is to say, of a list
in the kingdom of Assyria,
of annual functionaries
extending
over a period of about two hundred and seventy years of the
This is the most valuable
that great empire.
towards the recovery of ancient Asiatic
chro
made
since
the
has
been
time
Selden
which
when
nology
the contents of the Parian Chro
and published
deciphered
duration

of

contribution

and there is every

nicle, in the reign of Charles the First;
reason to believe that by means
of this document,
in con
the
of
dates
the
with
well-established
early portion
junction
of the Babylonian
Canon, we shall be enabled, not only to
fix with certainty the dates of the reigns of thirteen kings of
as
as the year B.C. 907; but also,
reaching
Assyria,
early
to recover tho exact date of the rise
with much probability,
in Assyria
of the first Chaldean dynasty
; or, in other words,
tho commencement
of the era of Ninus
and Semiramis.
Sufficient

time

tho contents
three eminent
Dr.
England,
Paris,

after

has now

elapsed for a full

of this valuable

of
investigation
and
document,
in
scholars, viz., Sir II. llawlinson
Assyrian
anel Monsieur
in Ireland,
Ilincks
in
Oppert

and bearing

careful

and

independent

examination,

have

pub

lished their comments upon it. They are as yet undecided

as to what was the exact nature of the functions
of these
or
For the
annual officers, whether military,
civil,
priestly.1
1 These officers were
the known character of
considering
probably military;
was
some of them, and that the whole army at Nineveh
annually changed, and
new officers appoiuted.
ii. p. 108.
Sec Diodorus, Rhodom.
vol.
10
i.?[new
semes].

146

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

purpose
archons.

of
It

reference, however, we may speak of them

is certain, that like the eponomous archons

as
of

and the consuls of Rome,

Athens,
they had the honour of
name
to the year in all public documents.
giving
It is satisfactory
to find, that with regard to one most
this Assyrian
of
record, viz., that which
portion
interesting
to range with the first sixty-seven
years of the
or tho era of Nabonassar,?that
of Ptolemy,
is, from
the
the year B.C. 747 to the year B.C. 680, comprehending
is
anel
which
of
Sennacherib,
reigns
Tiglathpilcser,
Sargon,
is found

Canon

is little
the period now proposed
to be discussed,?there
and that
the three Assyrian
difference between
authorities,
within a year or two at most, they are agreed as to the year
of office of each successive archon.
on tho
recent views of Sir H. Rawlinson
For the most
of the ?2nd August,
Canon wc may refer to the Athenncum
in the
his comments
1863.
Dr. Hincks
first published
Athenneum
of July, 1862, and has repeated his observations
in the Athe
and without variation,
with great distinctness,
nncum of the 24th October,
in his
18(33 ; and M. Oppert,
des Sar
Inscriptions
Assyriennes
samo
gonides,"
bearing date 1862, has adopted nearly tho
as Dr. Hincks,
as regards tho period under
arrangement
from
him above that time to the
inquiry, though differing
extent of ten or twenty years.
treatise

entitled,

"Les

The professed object both of Dr. Ilincks and M. Oppert is ,

as
to 6how, that the chronology
of the Assyrian
Canon,
and
settled by themselves and Sir II. Rawlinson,
is
confirms,
the commonly received reckoning of the
and Israel, as established on the authority of

in strict unison with

Kings of Judah
the great names

of Archbishop
Usshcr,
Scaliger, Petavius,
; while Sir H.
Blair, Clinton, and other modern chronologists
as to the true
himself
to
unable
Rawlinson,
satisfy
though
and Hebrew
is
mode of adjustment
of Assyrian
chronology,
of the common reckoning
of opinion that some modification
is required.
opposition
rangement

in
The writer of these observations maintains
to the two first, while folly accepting
their ar
Canon
of the list of archons, that the Assyrian

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

one

continuous
series
of Ussher,
throughout

presents
reckoning
seven

years

under

discussion,

of

clearly

to

contradictions

the whole

period

demonstrating

147
the

of .sixty
an

error

in that

of at least twenty-three
years in excess;
reckoning
and the object of this paper is to show, that when the events
recorded in sacred history in connexion with the three kings
arc
Tigiathpilescr,
Sargon, and Sennacherib,
ranged side by
same
side with
the
events
recorded in the contemporary
Assyrian
inscriptions which relate the annals of those reigns,
and when the dates of the Canon are attached to the events,
tho Hebrew
is the result, is not the chro
chronology which
of
Ussher
and
his
followers, but neither more nor less
nology
than the chronology of a Hebrew historian, who wrote in the
third

is to say, the
era,?that
century before the Christian
of
Demetrius.
chronology
Dr. Hincks
has the honour of being the first to point out
the exact year of contact between
the Assyrian
and Baby
lonian Canons, by which
the dates of the reigns of the
several Assyrian
and
archons have been determined.
kings
In a paper read before the Royal
Irish Academy
in 1852,
ten years before the discovery
of the Assyrian
Canon, he
directed attention to the inscription on a clay cylinder in the
British Museum,
commonly known as Bcllino's
cylinder, from
which it would appear that the date of Sennacherib's
accession
to the throne of Nineveh
must have been nearly concurrent
with the year b.c. 702, that is to say, just twenty-two
years
beforo

to

the

accession

of

his

son

Esarhaddon,

or Asaradinus,

of Babylon,
in n.c. G80, as set down
in
and from this opinion he has never
Canon;
Ptolemy's
swerved.
It has been already observed, that the mode of
tho
date of public documents
in Assyria was by
marking
name
of
the
the
archon
who
affixing
presided in the year of
Bellino's
Now
is inscribed with the
publication.
cylinder
name Neboliha,
the archon who stands fourth on the list
"
after
Sennacherib
the king;" and as tbe inscription contains
a record of the events of the first four years of Sennacherib's
in the fourth
reign, Dr. Hincks
rightly placed his accession
before
tbe
of
date
that year might
whatever
Neboliha,
year
the

throne

148

ASSYRIAN AND HERREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

also confirms this, and assures us

Sir Henry Rawlinson
a
that he has found
clay fragment dated in the seventh year
of Sennacherib,
bearing the name of the archon who stands
seventh on the list after Sennacherib;
and again, another
the
dated
in
year of Sennacherib,
twenty-second
fragment
name
the
the twenty
the
of
archon
Manu-zir-ilin,
bearing
second on the list. So that thero can bo no question as to
tbe true position
of tho reign of Sennacherib
the
amongst
nor
list of archons,
that the length of his reign extended over

be.

at least twenty-two
the Canon it appears that
From
years.
it lasted twenty-four years.
It now only remains to show how the date of tho year of
Let us follow
accession has been determined.
Sennacherib,
Mr.

translation of Bellino's
cylinder, published
of the Society, vol. xviii. Part 1, whero Sen
nacherib
thus records his own acts: "At tho beginning
of
my reign I destroj _d the armies of Mcrodac-Baladan,
king
man Belib
of Karduniash."."The
(or Belib-ni1)
a nobleman of the city of Suanna,2 who had been educated
like a gallant youth (or, like one of my own children, R.) in
my palace, I set over them, and made him king of Leshnan
Fox

Talbot's

in the Journal

Dr. Hincks, with much

and Akaddi," that is, of Babylonia.
acuteness, fixed upon these latter words as affording a clue to
the chronology of this king's reign, and it is now agreed on
all sides that the Belib, or Belib-ni
of the inscription, set on
at the beginning
the throne of Babylon
of
by Sennacherib
his reign, can be no other than the Belibus of the Babylonian
So that the
Canon, who began to reign in the year n.c. 702.
of Sennacherib's
reign must also be placed in that
beginning
very

year.

date of the whole arrangement

is the fundamental
of
the Aasyrian Canon, and it is of extreme importance that tho
on
reign, when ho set Belib-ni
point of time in Sennacherib's
the throne, should bo accurately
ascertained.
Dr. Hincks
and M. Oppert place the actual accession of Sennacherib
in
n.c. 703, and his first regnal year in n.c. 702; and
Taylor's
sixteen years later than Bellino's,
counten
cylinder, written
This

1 Bclib-ni.

Oppert

and Rawlinson.

Rabylon.

R.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

ances

the
this arrangement,
together
by putting
the beginning
those of the first
of the reign with
that, according to the later record, Belib-ni might
placed on the throne in the course of the year
king's

The

accession.

accuracy,

however,

of

the

events

149
of

So
year.
have been
after

the

contem

porary record, rather than tho looseness of the later docu

Wo
therefore adhere to tho year
ment, is to bo preferred.
b.c. 702, in
to
the
year b.c. 703, as the beginning
preference
of Sennacherib's
Sir
places the
reign.
Henry Rawlinson
b.c
But
accession of Sennacherib
in
the authority of
704.
neither

so early a date.
It is remark
copy No. 2 of the Canon places the accession
in the archonship
in the
of Pakharra-bil,
ac
4
before Neboliha,
the
No.
copy
places

cylinder
able, that while
of Sennacherib
fourth
cession

before

countenances

year
in the archonship
The
Neboliha.

in the third year

of Nebo-daini-pal,
one would
appear, with Bellino's
the year of accession
from the first
to
blend the year of
Taylor's cylinder,

to separate
cylinder,
the
other, with
year;
accession and first year together.
But if the date of one single king or archon in the list is
thus securely ascertained, tho dates of all the preceding and
succeeding archons, during the whole 270 years, are of course
ascertained with the same precision.
Thus it appears that
came to the throne in the
Sargon, the father of Sennacherib,
year B.C. 716, as certified by the third copy of the Canon, in
"
which year he is there first styled
It is of great im
king."
that
be accurately
the
of
also
should
portance
years
Sargon
that in his second year he took the city of
considering
Samaria, carrying
away 27,280
captives, and that Jewish
comes
thus
in
contact
with
in that year of
Assyrian
history
his reign. Now
the three Assyrian
authorities, who are
common
in favour of the
biassed
of
strongly
reckoning
in b.c
Ussher, which places the final capture of Samaria
fixed,

are all disposed

to place the accession of Sargon
five
B.c.
name
earlier
than
his
and
before
716,
years
appears in
the Canon, notwithstanding
the evidence of the third copy of
the Canon to the contrary;
and it is assumed by them that
orMardocempadua
the twelve years' reign of Merodac-baladan,
721,

150

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

of Ptolemy's
Canon, which began in B.C. 721,1 were com
mensurate with the twelve first years of
This idea
Sargon.
is supposed to be supported
a passage in
by
Sargon's annals,2
where in that
king's twelfth year ho captures Merodac-baladan
the son of Yakin,
and destroys his capital in Chaldea, speak
ing of him as having disturbed Babylonia
during a period of
twelve years.
Merodac-baladan
not king of
vanced

But

to M. Oppcrt's
translation,8
according
is styled in this passage king of Chaldea,
and his army appears to have ad
Babylon,

from Chaldea.

is no reason, tboroforo, for

hero
years
supposing
spoken of to be any other
than the twelve first years of
own reign.
Should it
Sargon's
even be admitted
that the twelve years' reign of Merodac
are here referred to, which
is
baladan, as king of Babylon,
contrary to the tenour of the passage, still the words would
not
to his former
than a reference
necessarily
imply more
the

There

twelve

as an intruder for that term. But it

occupation of Babylon
is quite unnecessary
to dwell upon questionable
evidence of
this nature,
to
fix
the
the
of
years
whereby
reign of Sargon,
nice
inflexions
and
of the Assyrian
construction
resting upon
can
no
as
because
there
be
to tho archon
language,
question
under whose
the reign of Sargon
commenced.
presidency
M. Oppert informs us that there is in the Louvro4 a docu
ment dated in the twelfth year of
Sargon, which is inscribed
with the name Manu-ki-Asshur-liha,
who was archon in B.C.
So that if Sargon's twelfth year
706, according to our table.
"
was n.c. 706, wo may without fear of error
place tho
begin
ning" of his reign in the year B.C. 717, during the archonship
of Asshur-tirrat-danin,
and the end of his first year in B.C.
716.
In fact, M.
"Tho true reign
Oppert himself writes:
of Sargon evidently dates from his fourth year, that is, from
the year when

he was

cponyme,"

or archon.5

Tho

capture

1
Certified by three eclipses in the first and second year.
*
des Sargonidcs, p. 28.
3 Oppcrt's Inscrip. Assyr.
"Mcrodah
Ills de J akin, roi dc ChaldeV'."
avait excite
Baladan,
contrc moi toutcs les tribus nomades.
II se preimra a unc bataille, et se porta en
avant.
12 ans, contre la volonte des dicux dc
Pendant
la ville dc Pel
Rabylonc,
qui jugc les dicux, il avait excite le pays des Sumirs et des Accads et leur avait
des embassades."
envoyc
4
* Ibid.
Inscrip. Assyr. des Sargonidcs, p. 3.
p. 20.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

151

son of Yakin,
of Merodac-baladan,
therefore, must be placed
in the year of the archonship of Manu-ki-Asshur-liha.
seems to
But if so, since the language of the inscriptions
more
that
than
fifteen
Sargon reigned
imply
years,1 and his
fifteenth year, B.C. 702, would thus be commensurate with the
the later years of his
first of Sennacherib,
reign must have
so
the
of
coincided with
the reign of Sennacherib;
early years
b.c
as
first year,
that Sennacherib's
702, must be looked upon
his
in
association
with
This inference seems
father.
merely
to be favoured by a passage in Abydenus, who, speaking of
"
observes that ho was scarcely to be recognized
Sennacherib,
the kings,"2 which well accords with the idea of
amongst
It is also sup
life.
during his father's
quasi sovereignty
1
of
No.
the
Canon, which does
ported apparently by copy
not oven givo the name of Sennacherib as archon till eighteen
years after his nominal accession ; while copies No. 2, and 4,
b.c. 702, in
with
another
conjunction
give his name, in
archon, an arrangement which occurs in connexion with no
and copy No. 3 seems to name
other king than Sennacherib;
not till the year
him as king under the title Asshur-acherib,
n.c. 684.
This suggestion,
that Sennacherib
ascended
the
the
throne of Assyria
of
his
lifetime
will
father,
during
prove to be of some importance when we come to the con
of the reign of Shalmanezer,
and we shall then
recur to it. For the present,
to
have
occasion
again
having
fixed the accession of Sargon to the year B.C. 717, we proceed
to ascertain the date of the reign of his predecessor, Tiglath
of
Copy No. 4 of the Canon places the beginning
pileser.
sideration

the reign of Tiglathpileser

in the year following
the archon
tbat
is
to
in
of
the
Nebo-bil-uzur,
say,
year b.c 741.
ship
on the same principle which seems to
No.
1,
Copy
regulate
in that copy, includes
tho years of Sargon and Sennacherib
the year of accession, and places the line which marks
the
one
of
and
Sir
Rawlinson
year earlier,
change
reign
Henry
accordingly
places the broken year of accession of Tiglath
pileser
1

in

the

archonship

of Nebo-bil-uzur,

invaded Cyprus, as proved

Sargon
invasion is not mentioned
in his annals,
* Euscb. Auch.
p. 26.

or b.c

by his statue found at Idalium;

extending over fifteen years.

742,
but this

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

152

to our reckoning;
and there can be no doubt that
according
means
he is correct.
of the astronomical Canon of
Thus, by
and with the same degree of certainty that attaches
Ftolemy,
to the earlier dates of that Canon, we have fixed the dates
of the three reigns:
Tiglathpileser.n.c.
Sargon.
Sennacherib.

742-1.
717-16.

702-1.
In ascending above the year B.C. 742, and searching for tbe
we come upon a
of Tiglathpileser,
reign of the predecessor
the Hebrew
for at this point
subject of great difficulty;
are
and
the
Canon
in con
Scriptures
apparently
Assyrian
tradiction one with the other.
As this is a point beyond the
strict range of our inquiry, which is limited to the reigns of
and his two prodecessors, we are not called upon
Sennacherib
to enter very
since the
Nevertheless,
fully into the question.
of Dr. Hincks
and M. Oppert is
arrangement
chronological
somo
connected with
it, we will not pass it by without
observation.
From the Hebrew
(2 Kings xv. 19)
Scriptures
"
we learn
that Pul was
when
distinctly
king of Assyria,"
a thousand talents
of
him
Mcnahem,
Samaria,
gave
king
of silver to confirm him on tho throne.
From
tho same
source also (1 Chron. v. 20) we learn that Pul was tho im
mediate

of Tiglathpileser,
The
king of Assyria.
an
of
also
of
history
Assyrian
speaks
dynasty
which
lasted
till
the
time
of
Phul.
We
there
cannot,
kings
fore, reasonably doubt that a king bearing that title reigned
over the
cither seated on the throne of Nineveh,
Assyrians,
as supreme
or
there
On
lord over Assyria.
acknowledged
the

predecessor
of Berosus

other

equally
widely

hand,
distinct

of the Assyrian
the evidence
Canon
is
or some name
in naming Asshur-zallus,
from Pul, as the immediate predecessor
of
and three Assyrian
scribes, in three inde

differing
Tiglathpileser;
pendent copies of the Canon, have each appended the title
"
"
to his name.
There is no room, therefore, for doubt
king
that king Asshur-zallus,
or whatever may have been his real
on the
of Tiglathpileser
name, was the actual predecessor
are
we
throne of Nineveh.
to
account
for
tho
How,
then,

Extract

Rawlinson*s

from

Assyrian

Canon.

ARCHONS AT NINEVEH,
n.c.

750

1.

Canon No.
"
Asshur-zallus

No.

Canon

2.

Canon

No.

3.

Canon

No.

4.

~i
the?

(?),

Miiodach-HulUin-anui

4
3

?
Hhamas-idatlik-kul
5
Yam-bil-ikin
Siu-Hallim-anni
Norgal-nazir

Nebo-bil-uzur

740 Tukulti-pali-thirra
9
8
7
G
5
4
3
2
1
730
9
8
7
(j
5

Ncbo-danin-anni
Ittlu-kas
(!) bil-uzur
Ncbo-kanr-anni
|iSin-taggil
Yam-bii-ikin
|Bil-liimui-aimi
Bar-Anunit
Asshur-sallini-anni
Bil-ribu-cl
Assbiu-danin-anni
Nebo-bil-uzur
Norgal-vapallit
?
Uil-lu-dari ? ? ?
? _
Napkhar-ol
?
Idur-A8shur ? _

4
3
2
1
720

Bilu-kas (I)-bil-uzur
Mcrodacb-hil-uzur ?
Tizkaru (?) ? ?
? ?
AHshui-khalli
j
AksIiui- ....
(lost)

Assbur-zallus
king
king

(!) the
(?), the jAsshur-zallus
of Assyria
king

0? 8uinei-<4
?
7?llil-ribu-el
?
(?)
Yam-bil-ikin
Sin-salliin-ani
Nergal-nazii

Nhiiihi-iI HaniHi-cl
Alcrodach-sallim-minl
Mtrodaeh-sallim-anni
Jlil-ribu-cl Bil-ribu-H
Slianias-iilallik-kul
Shamas-idallik-kul (?)
(?)
Asshur-bil-ikin
Yain-bil-ikin
Ktit-salliiii-ani Sin-sallim-aiiui
Nfigal-nazir
Nirgal-nazir

Ncbo-bil-u/ur

Nobo-bil-uzur

Nebo-bil-uzur

iTukulti-pali-thirra,
i llil-ribu-el
1 im-ribu-cl
IJil-iibu-d
mini.ttwmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
<>fASSJHa
mmm^^mmmKm^mmmmmm^m
?
I_ |
the
Tukulti-pali-thirra,
|
king
?
Nobo-danin-anni ?
? ?
I
Bil-zukas(?)-bil-uzur
?
Ncbo-karir-anni ?
?
?
Sin-taggil j
?
Yam-ikin? '
?
Bil-limmi-aiii ?i
??
Bar-Anuuit [
??
Assbur-sallim-aimi
?
IBil-ribu-el ?
?
Assbur-danin-uni ? ?
Nebo-bil-uzur ? ~~
?
Nergal-vapallit

??
??

?
?
?

_I

king

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

153

"
of the name of
Pul king of Assyria,"
from the list
of Assyrian
is more
in the Canon?
The difficulty
kings
absence

apparent

than

real.

For

Berosus,

when

Pul,

naming

speaks

not as one of the Assyrian

line of kings, but very
a
as
of
the
who
Chaldeans,
plainly
king
having gained pos
session of the empire, put an end to a dynasty of Assyrian
there
Asshur-zallus,
kings which had lasted for 526 years.
B.C.
who
till
the
fore, king of Nineveh,
743,
year
reigned
of him,

to the Canon, and whose successor on the throne

according
was
of Nineveh
must have reigned contem
Tiglathpileser,
with "Pul king of Assyria."
The obvious in
poraneously
ference from these facts is, that the kingdom
of Nineveh,
and
the
of
Asshur-zallus,
during
reign
probably also of his
a
time
under
the yoke of the
had
for
fallen
predecessor,
a nation then
Chaldeans,
rising into great power, and whose
seat of government was at Beth-Yakina,
towards the head of
Pul, the Chaldean king, must have been
Gulph.
son of
the predecessor
the
of
great king Merodac-baladan,
to the inscriptions
contended with
who according
Yakin,
successors
anel
his
Tiglathpileser
during forty years, and the
the Persian

seat of his
Beth-Yakina;
may

presume

throne must
while
were

have

been,

Asshur-zallus
suffered

to

not at Nineveh,
and

remain

his
as

but at

predecessor

tributary

kings

we
at

to the Chaldean king.

This state
we ma}r infer
to the Chaldeans,
a king who was
of Tiglathpileser,
the throne of
seized
usurped it,
successors
were
under
and
his
the
Chaldeans
whom
Nineveh,
and from Babylon, and at one time even
driven from Assyria,
from Chaldea
itself, taking refuge in the Persian Gulph.
Such appears to bo the simple explanation
of a difficulty,
that
to
has
Dr.
M.
and
which
led
Hincks
suggest,
Oppert
Nineveh,
paying homage
of Assyria
of subjection
lasted till the strong hand
not born to the title but

the names of not less than thirty or forty archons at Nineveh

the
have been omitted from the Assyriau
Canon, between
to
order
and
in
make
of
Asshur-zallus
reigns
Tiglathpileser,
room for the
supposed reign of Pul.
There is no record left of the actual length of the reign of
Pul, nor of the exact time when he first assumed the title of

154

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

Could we ascertain this date, we

"king of Assyria.3'
be enabled,
to count up to tho
through Berosus,
Ninus and Semiramis at Babylon.
For Berosus reckons that tbe first 49 Chaldean kings rcigued
9 Arabian
?
?
45 Assyrian
?
?

should
date

of

458 yrs.
145! ?
526 ?

an assertion mado more than

if wo might
rely upon
in
M.
his
by
printed works,2 that a document
Oppert
exists in the British Museum,
that Tiglathpileser
proving
to
in
the
twentieth
of
his predecessor,?
year
began
reign
_ invasion,?tho
that is, in tho twentieth
in
of
Pul
year
ference would be that Pul's
invasion of Assyria
took place
about the year B.C. 760, and that the dynasty
of Assyrian

Now,
once

commenced 526 years before his time, came to

kings, which
the throne in the year B.C. 1286.
And if we add to this date
145 yrs. for an Arabian dynasty,
and
458 ?
Chaldean
?
?
we arrive at the year b.c. 1889 as the era of the first Chal
or era of Ninus.
dean dynasty at Babylon,
as regards the
This result, being founded on conjecture,
course
no
affords
positive evi
length of the reign of Pul, of
dence that the year B.C. 1889 was tho truo date of the era of
it agrees so remarkably
with what
Ninus.
Nevertheless,
the epoch of
have recorded concerning
historians
Assyrian
we
can
the
correctness
of the con
doubt
that
Ninus,
hardly
all
and
clusion.
Castor,
Ctesias,
point to this
Abydenus,
as
the
commencement
the
of
date
very
kingdom of
marking
the
wero
histories of Castor and Abydenus,
they
list of
agreed, and that they had each copied the complete
the kings of Assyria,
from Ninus
down to
and Semiramis
Sardanapalus, who is declared to be tho last of the Assyrian

Ninus

and Semiramis,

Eusebius,

who

tells

kings;

and that they computed

167 years

had
us

before

him

that

from Sardanapalus

1 The
the
Rut if Castor has correctly preserved
figure in the text is 245.
there would
to the end of the reign of Sardanapalus,
interval of 1280 from Ninus
appear to be exactly 100 years in excess in copying the figures from Berosus.
2
des Assyrieus
et des Babylonians,
p. 7. Les Inscriptions Ab
Chronologic
p. 12.
syriens des Sargonides,

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

155

(that is, from the end of his reign) to the first Olympiad.1
ceased
So that, according to these authorities,
Sardanapalus
to reign in the year b.c 609, or 608, in which
latter year
himself
Eusebius
accordingly
places the fall of Nineveh.2
He then quotes a passage from Castor, showing that from the
to the accession of another king bearing
accession of Ninus
same
the last of
the
title, who reigned after Sardanapalus,
a
If then we
the Assyrian
kings, was
period of 1280 years.
add 1280 years to the year b.c 609, we find that the era of
to Abydenus
and Castor, was b.c 1889.
has preserved tho very same date, reckoning
by the Medes
upwards from the final destruction of Nineveh
and Babylonians,
set
fire to his
the Assyrian
when
king

Ninus,

according
Again, Ctesias

tho As
in despair;
supposing
incorrectly, however,
of his
to
instead
been Sardanapalus,
have
syrian
king
successor Saracus.
For tho empire of the Assyrians
truly
ended in tho reign of Sardanapalus,
the last of the dynasty

palace

in b.c 609, who must have been the

(omnium postremus)
in b.c
called
the
in
who
assistance of the Scythians
king
From
savo
Modes.
to
Nineveh
the
from
610,
capture by
as Herodotus
fell
that time, however,
informs us, Assyria
under the dominion
for a period of twenty
of tbe Scythians
eight years, that is, till the year b.c 583. At the expiration
of those twenty-eight
years, soon after the great solar eclipse
of the
of b.c 585?the
the chronology
date which governs
was finally destroyed by Cyaxares, king of
period?Nineveh
or
as
historians
Ctesias and the Assyrian
affirm, by
Media,
the combined
forces of the Medes and Babylonians.
Tbis,
is the period referred to in the history
then, undoubtedly
from which Ctesias took his information, when the palace at
Nineveh

was

Saracus,

not

burnt,

and

Sardanapalus,

the

last of

perished

tho Assyrian
the flames.

in

kings,
Now

1 "Deindc
et Semiramidc
recensct, usque ad Sardanapallum,
singulos a Nino
: a quo
clficiunter anni
qui fuit omnium postremus
usque ad Tirimam Olympiadem
lxvii"
ita
singillalim
(lege ci.xvn).
Abydenus
itaque dc regno Assyriorum
At non ipse solum, sed ctiam Castor in primo Chronicorum
orevi volu
6cripsit.
mine, ad hujus exempli formam 6yllabatim quidem de Assyriorum
regno narrat.?
Euscb. Auch. p. 39.
a Ibid.
p. 109.

156

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

Ctesias

reckons 1306 years, from the time when

tho Modes
and Babylonians
to
Nineveh
the
destroyed
reign of Ninus
the first king, which number
of years added to the year
b.c. 583,
us
brings
again exactly to tho samo year, B.C. 1889,
for the era of Ninus and Semiramis.1
The adjustment
of the Assyrian
and Babylonian
Canons
thus 6ecm8 to lead with accuracy to the recovery of a very
1 Frofcssor
in his 2d vol. of " Ancient Monarchies,"
on
Rawlinson,
published
the day that this paper was read, writes p. 288, " Rcrosus placed the destruction
of Nineveh
or
in the first year of Nabopolassar,
n.c. 625, according
to the Canon
of Ptolemy,"
and too boldly asserts that Mthe direct authority for this important
fact is Abydenus."
if
faith
to
is
be placed in Herodotus,
the destruction
Now,
of Nineveh
took place at the end of a period of twenty-eight
which period
years,
both began and ended in the reign of
If, then, these
king of Media.
Cyaxares,
n.c.
n.c.
ended
in
must
have begun in
662.
But
years
625, they
twenty-eight
will Mr. Rawlinson
venture to affirm that Cyaxares was on the throne of Media
so early as n.c. 652 ?
was
and
at
alive
the time of
Cyaxares
reigned forty years,
the eclipse of n.c. 685, so that he could not have come to the throne earlier than
n.c. 626, nor could the arrival of the
have taken place till after that
Scythians
date.
On the contrary, we havo
Again, this is not the reckoning ol Abydenus.
seen
a
from
not
to by Mr. Rawlinson,
referred
that Abydenus
passage,
already
in the vcar n.c. 609; and in the passage
to
placed the fall of Sardanapalus
which the learned Professor docs refer, Abydenus
distinctly records that the de
struction of Nineveh was at the cud of the reign of Saracus, who reigned after
the last
he
fixes the time
Moreover,
Sardanapalus,
very plainly
Assyrian king.
son of Busa
of the overthrow of the city to the time when Nabuchourossorus,
son
of
took
that
the
throne
of Babylon,
Nebuchadnezzar
lossor,
is,
Nabonalassar,
and surrounded
that city with a strong wall.
therefore, the destruc
Clearly,
as
tion of Nineveh
from Berosus, was at tho
copying
placed by Abydenus,
of the reign of Naoopolassar.
This
end, not at the beginning
king un
doubtedly began to reign in the year n.c. G25, and as certainly his son Nebu
came to the throne of Babylon
after his death.
chadnezzar
But
immediately
there is no such certainty as to the time of his death.
The common idea is
that he died twenty-one
But Polyhistor,
who also took
years after n.c. 625,
was
of Assyria
his history
from Berosus,
tells us plainly
that Sardanapalus
the father of Nebuchadnezzar,*
that is, that Nabonalassar
and Sardanapalus
were one?that
to overthrow Nineveh?
it was he who combined with the Mcucs
and that on the fall of Saracus he took the throne of Babylon,
that is to say, in
With
his old age, long after his ejection from the throne of Nineveh.
this
the contemporary of Berosus, agrees, who says that Sardanapalus
also Clictarchus,
lived to a great age, after having
lost the empire of Syria, that is, of Assyria.
All this well accords with the testimony of Abydenus, who, though he docs not
fell the full
the actual length of the reign of Saracus, declares that Nineveh
?;ivc
ength of that reign after the year n.c. 609, thus leading us into the following
as
we
have seen,
therefore, Herodotus,
century for the date of the event. When,
soon after the eclipse of n.c.
actually fixes the time of the overthrow of Nineveh
585 ; and when Demetrius,
who wrote not long after Berosus, places the first year
after the fall of Nineveh?in
of Nebuchadnezzar?which
followed
immediately
seems to place tho
the year n.c. 582, the concurrence
of historical
testimony
not in the year n.c. 625, as the learned Professor suggests,
destruction of Nineveh,
but at the end of the twenty-eight
in n.c. 683. All
years of Scythian domination,
set forth by the writer
which
has been more
in Part iii., vol. ii. of the
fully
of the Chronological
Institute.
Transactions
* Euseb. Auch.
p. 22.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

157

remote

and interesting
epoch in ancient history, which has
the subject of much difference of opinion, ancient and
of Castor, Abydenus,
modern.
And
thus the histories
and
a
state
to
in
of
be
irreconcileable
hitherto
Ctesias,
supposed
been

into harmony, both with

contradiction,
appear to be brought
each other, and with the Canon.
This in itself is an interesting result, springing
incidentally
out of the subject under examination,
and is worthy of further
It is not, however,
the matter now in hand.
investigation.
Wo proceed, therefore, to point out a still more interesting,
and iu its results more important, inference to be derived from
this invaluable
of
record, viz., that the common reckoning
Hebrew chronology as arranged by Archbishop Ussher and his
of Assyria with tbe
followers
is, as regards the connexion
error
to the extent of twenty-three
years; and
Holy Land, in
of the third century
that the reckoning of the Jew Demetrius
is in unison with the Canon in every particular,
B.C., which
must be substituted
in its place.
Let us return to the reign of Sennacherib, whose accession
wo have
Mr.
already fixed to the year b.c 702.
Following
we
now
Fox Talbot's
translation of Bellino's
read,
cylinder,
that in the next year, b.c 701, tribute was received by
and the inhabi
from Nebo the chief of Ararat,
Sennacherib
In the following year, b.c
tants of Kishmi were destroyed.
and the land of Illipi was attacked, and
700, Beth-kilamzakh
Thus far all is clear and
tribute paid by tho distant Medes.1
free from dilliculty.
But at tbis point arises a question of
much
and one upon which the accurate adjust
importance,
ment of Scripture with the Assyrian
Canon depends.
Tbe
b.c 699, is the
fourth year from tbe accession of Sennacherib,
is
and Bellino's
of Neboliha,
year of the archonship
cylinder
No warlike events
dated in the seventh month of tbat year.
seven months,
arc recorded as
having taken place during those
but on the contrary tho record on the cylinder is confined to
a
a description
of the peaceful operation of building
magni
tbe
of
ficent palace by the hands of
war, under the
prisoners
direction of king Sennacherib himself, who being thus engaged
1 Journ.

11. Asiatic

Society,

vol. xviii.,

part

i., p. 79.

158

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

during the first half of the year could not have conducted a
distant campaign
in tho same year, involving
the capture of
more than
was
walled
which
of Senna
result
the
cities,
forty
as we learn from more than one
cherib's third campaign,
For this third campaign appears to have com
inscription.
that
famous expedition into Syria, Palestine,
and Egypt,
prised
to the inscriptions, Iluloous, king of Sidon,
when, according
was deposed; when Ilczekiah, king of Judab, was shut up in
Jerusalem, and fprty-six of his fenced cities taken, and when
a tribute of
thirty talents of gold and eight hundred talents
of silver was laid upon him ; and when also, as we learn from
Scripture, Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, came out against Senna
cherib

in battle.

It is quite clear, therefore, that Sennacherib's

could not have taken place till after the fourth

third campaign
year of his reign, that is to say, till after the archonship of
Neboliha.
Dr. Hincks
and M. Oppert are con
Nevertheless,
to place the campaign
in this
strained by their arrangement
sees
and
the
II.
llawlinson
avoids
Sir
year.
very
difficulty,
to b.c 704, and by
by raising the first year of Sennacherib
in the year after the archonship of
placing the third campaign
or B.c 700
in
the
fifth
that
is
Neboliha,
year of Sennacherib,
three
to
All
authorities
in coming
his
according
reckoning.
to this result are mainly influenced by the supposed identifica
tion of Asshur-nadin,
tho eldest son of Sennacherib,
who, in
his fourth campaign, was set on the throne of Babylon
by his
or
of the Canon of
Assaranadius
father, with the Apronadius
So that, if tho
Ptolcmjr, who came to tho throne in b.c 699.
is thus fixed to the year b.c 699, the third
fourth campaign
must necessarily have taken place in the preceding year, b.c.
700.
This argument
is no doubt specious, and if not contra
dicted by facts, would bo of some weight.
the
Nevertheless,
inference derived from it is so entirely inconsistent with what is
derived from other authentic records, that it isquite inadmissible.
and
For, in the first place, while the identity of Apronadius1
6on
is
it
is
of
Sennacherib,
Asshur-nadin,
questionable,
quite
1
reinstated on tbe fall of
Apronnclius was probably tbe brotber of Scnnacbcrib,
Tbe tbird year spoken of by Polyhistor
not
Belibns.
is the third of Sennacherib,
the third of Belibus.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

159

are
and Asordanius
of Polyhistor
certain that Asshur-nadin
as we shall presently
one and the same king;
and Polyhistor,
on the throne, not in B.C. 699, but 689.
see, places Asordanius
invasion of Judaea is placed in
And again, if Sennacherib's
as we shall
B.C. 700, neither the Tyrian annals of Menander,
can be re
show, nor the record of the Hebrew Scriptures,
conciled with that date.1
In this difficulty we are fortunately enabled to resort for a
solution to another valuable document, also now in the British
Museum, which throws quite a different light on tbe question.
Let us consult the record on the famous cylinder known as
recounts the particulars
of eight
cylinder, which
tbe
time
of his
from
conducted
Sennacherib,
campaigns
by
accession down to the archonship
of Billimiani,
with whose
name the cylinder
is inscribed.

Taylor's

Now Billimiani
presided as archon both in the fifteenth and
and the autho
twentieth years of the reign of Sennacherib,
rities are at issue as to which of these years should mark the
date of the cylinder.
Sir II. Rawlinson
places the inscription
in the former of these two years, n.c. 688; M. Oppert and
Dr. Hincks
to their reckon
in the latter, n.c. 684, according
our
in
683
That
this
second
table.
is the
arrangement
ing,
true ono is sufficiently manifest
from the fact that Senna
that is his sixth, seventh, and
cherib's three last campaigns,
and
the
sixth
eighth of which Susub is re
eighth, during
corded to have been on the throne of Babylon,
viz., in 686,
or of
of
thus
fall
in
three
with
685, 684,
years
interregnum,
and disputed
disturbed
succession at Babylon,
left blank in
if these three campaigns
the Canon of Ptolemy.
Whereas
are placed, with Sir Henry,
in the years 691, 690, and 689,
fall at a time
the years of the reign of Susub2 at Babylon
1 Professor Rawlinson
and Assyrian numbers are bere
Hebrew
observes?"The
I would propose to read in 2 Kings xviii. 13, twenty-seventh
irrcconcilcable.
for
to this supposed invasion in the
in addition
fourteenth."
And again,
twenty
invaded Judiea a second time in the
seventh year," suggests
that Sennacherib
All which is directly opposed to Jewish
year of Hczckiah.
twenty-ninth
history,
leads us to suppose that the last years of Ilczekiah were years of peace.?
which
Anc. Mon. vol. ii. p. 434 and 439.
2 There is a tablet in the British Museum dated in the
ieign of Susub.?Raw
linson's Anc. Mon. vol. ii. p. 452.

160

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

when the throne of Babylon was otherwise

occupied, that is
to say when itwas held apparently in undisturbed possession by
Canon.
This latter arrange
of the Babylonian
Mesessimordac
And thus we arrive at
ment therefore is quite inadmissible.
the remarkable
inference that while the second campaign of
Sennacherib
took place as early as the year B.C. 700, accord
ing to our reckoning, his sixth campaign did not take placo
them of
till the year B.C. 686, leaving an interval between
thirteen years; and also that during ten years of this interval
and his
in abeyance,
Sennacherib's
power was apparently
for
considera
The important question
reign without annals.
is, did his third, fourth, and fifth campaigns
soon
three years of this interval, following
occupy
after the second campaign, as assumed by the three Assyrian
or did they occupy the last three years immedi
authorities,
as we now propose to
the sixth campaign,
ately preceding
third
did
the
In
other
P
words,
against
prove
campaign
take place about the year B.C.
and Egypt,
Syria, Palestine,
tion

therefore

the first

700,

or

as

we

determine,

after

an

apparent

interregnum

of

collateral evidence in favour of

ten years,
that it
is so clear and distinct
dates
the latter of these two
seems to be impossible to set it aside.
in B.C. 689 ?

The

who places the first year of Nebuchadnezzar

I. Polyhistor,
in the year B.C. 604, counts 88 years upwards from that date
of the reign of Sennacherib,
to the beginning
showing that
of that reign in B.C. 692,1 and the
he placed the beginning
The computation we be
third year, therefore, in B.C. 689.
lieve to be erroneous, but the date of the reign of Senna
distinct.
cherib is nevertheless
whose reckoning wo shall show agrees in
II. Demetrius,
about fifty years after
all respects with the Canon, writing
seen
no
that author's work,
doubt
and who had
Berosus,
457 years beforo
places the invasion of Judaea by Sennacherib
n.c.
689-8.
in
that is,
the reign of the fourth Ptolemy,
the
The year b.c. 689 was a sabbatical year with
III.
"
1 Sir Cornewall Lewis
of tbe Ancients,
p. 430,
Assuming
writes, Astronomy
at
of
b.c.
the
to
fixed
be
the capture of Babylon
538,
chronology
by Cyrus
at B.C. 693."
Berosus would place the accession of Sennacherib

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

\Q{

Jews, counted in regular series from three sabbatical years,

the dates of which are fixed by Josephus;l
and in the year
in which Sennacherib
invaded Judaoa we read these words of
encouragement
spoken to the Jewish king and people?"This
shall be a sign unto you," (that Sennacherib
shall not besiege
eat
of
this
that
shall
which growcth
year
Jerusalem)
"ye
use
itself" (that is, in the open field);
the very words made
of with

reference

to the sabbatical
the invasion
in a sabbatical

institution.

So that

taken place
year b.c 700, however, falls
years, and was not sabbatical.2

have
The

year at the time of its

of Judooa would appear to
b.c 689 was.
year, which
in the midst

of a week

of

in conjunction
the testimony
of the inscriptions,
Lastly,
the
annals
with
of Menander,
preserved by Josephus,
Tyrian
is decisive on the question.
For, the first event recorded in
is the deposition
of Lu
the third campaign of Sennacherib
liah king of Sidon, and the setting up of Tubaal in his stead ;
in an inscription copied by Mr. Layard, and referred to
to
Dr.
is said to have fled from Tyre
Luliah
Hincks,
by
are
tbis
in
in
All
Cyprus.
recognizing
agreed, therefore,
and

tho Ilukcus king

king
and Menander
certifies
to the
Now,
according

of Tyre
tbat he

spoken

of

by Menander;

years.:{
reigned
thirty-six
which
places Sennache
reckoning
in b.c 700, there is found to be no
rib's third campaign
on
the
throne
of Tyre for a continuous
vacancy
reign of
ac
while
years about the time of Sennacherib;
thirty-six
our
the thirty-six
years reign of tbis
cording to
reckoning,

For,
great king of Tyre are accounted for with exactness.
b c.
the
if we reckon
from
year
years upwards
thirty-six
700, we come to the year 736 for the first year of IluUeus,
to prove
when we have the evidence of Assyrian
inscriptionsl
that Hiram,
after Hiram

was on the throne of Tyre, and tbat

who was still on the throne
reigned Mit-enna,

not Ilubcus,

1 See the writer's

iv. vol. ii. of the
in Part
treatise on Hebrew
chronology
of the Chronological
Transactions
Institute.
2 Sir II.
who admits the force of this argument, assumes that there
Rawlinson,
was a second invasion
in the year n.c. 689, in the last year ot
by Sennacherib
Hezekiah.
3
4
Athenaeum, August 22, 18')'].
Josephus, Ant. IX. xiv. 2.
vol.

i.?[new

series],

11

162

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

about

b.c
the twelfth year of the reign of Tiglathpileser,
to the Canon.
So that the Tyrian
annals
730, according
cannot under this arrangement
be reconciled with the As
On
this
the histo
syrian inscriptions.
ground accordingly
rical character of Menander's
record has been,
invaluable
rashly as we think, called in question both by Sir Henry,
and Professor Rawlinson.1
On the other hand, if wo count
thirty-six years upwards from n.c 689, wo come to the year

B.c 725, in which year Mit-enna may have ceased to

reign; and
on
a king
we
to
the
find
that
Canon
of
turning
Ptolemy
same
this
at
in
to
title, Ilukcus, began
bearing
Babylon
reign
the year b.c 726-5.
The coincidence
of date and name is so
of Tyro, and
exact, that we cannot but infer that llukeus
Ilulflcus of Babylon were one and the same king.2
But if so,
it is clear that as Ilulanis

came to the throne in b.c 726-5, and

full
years, he did not cease to reign till the
reigned thirty-six
b.c
must
which
therefore have been the year of
year
689,
third campaign.
Sennacherib's
This identification
of the Babylonian
Ilulncus with the king
of T}rrc, opens an interesting
of
subject
inquiry concerning
the political
and commercial
between Tyre and
relations
and the dependence
of the one city upon the other
Babylon,
for

its prosperity,
about tho time of which wc arc speak
a
ing ; subject worthy of a few Avoids of digression.
as Herodotus
The Phoenicians,
informs us,3 came originally
from the Erythraean
sea, or Persian Gulph ; and we learn

from Justin

themselves upon the

they first established
a
that
in
Avith the river
lake
connexion
is,
lake,1
Assyrian
west
of
convenient
for con
Euphrates,
Babylon,?a
position
ibc
trade
from
tho
ducting
Gulph through Baby
carrying
aud from thence, in course of time, they made their
lonia,?
that

sea, first establishing

way to the coast of the Mediterranean
at
themselves
the city
Sidon, and after many years building
of Tyre.
Aradus, Tripolis, Dora, and Joppa, wc know were
also numbered
1
Rawlinson's
2 Professor
this denial
8 Herod,

amongst

the Phoenician

cities.

Strabo

vol. i., p. 471.

Herodotus,
Rawlinson
denies the identity of the two kings,
is given.
Anc. Mou. vol. ii., p. 131.
*
i.
1.
Justin, xviii. 3.

informs

but no reason

for

Kings of

Kings of
_

Baiiylon.

j
I
i

717 | 1 Nabonassar
2
5
3! |
4 14
3 j 5|
17
8
740
0
9
8 10
0

12

and Assyrian

Tynan,

Babylonian,

Kings of
Nineveh.

Tyue.

Chronology

| Annals of

Sennacherib

|
I

2 6 1 Tiglathpileser
2
3
4
ft
Hiram

i
I

combined.

I
I
Tiglathpileser takes tribute of
7 11 6 Mcnahcm, Re/in, and Uiram.

5 [ 13I 8

4 14 19
i
3
1 Nadius
2
2
1
1 Chinzcms 12
2
and
Mitcnna
730
U
3 Porus. 14 I
8
4
7 15
6
1 IIuIojuh
Ilulccus
5
2
1
4
3
2
3 |
43
2 [
45
1
225
1Mardoc2
6
720
empadus
9
7
3

I8

7I5 9
10 l

G I 0

3
9
2 10
lit
710 12
9
1 Archianus
8
2
7
3
0 I4
5.
Belibus
12
9

1 Apronadius

27 4

I29
30

6
1 llcgibelus
1 Mcsessi2
mordac
3

1I
9 j

23
24

I25

5 7 11 2

3
4
5
G
I

28

<

8
9
10
11
| 12
| 13I
I 14
15.1 Sennacherib
2
3 700
320

Asaradinus 23

Pekah slain.

1st campaign
2atl
??

Sargon associates Sennacherib with

him on the throne, (and takes the
t'tle Shalmanczer, uu.)

5
i6
9
33

34
H
35 12
13[
36

Sargon takes Samaria.

I
I

4 |0

32

680

!
I

15
10
17I I
! 18
i 19
20
|
21

20 Sargon

13
14
15
7I 10
17
18
19
I20
5 21
4i 22
323
24
12
25

13

I 12

4
3
2
1
690 I

10
11

Shalmanezcr
Samaria.
8

l0

"Shalman" and "king Jarcb," that

iR?Shalmanczer and Sennacherib,
x. 0-11.
contemporaries.?lloshea

|
^
13
10
17
18
5
10

3 I 20
21
I 22
I 24

94
8
6j
4I

3*"dcampaign
4th
?
5th
?
6th
?
7th
?
8th
ii

(qu. Sargon) takes

lloshea deposed.

7 I
5 5 31 I

Sennacherib invades Judaea.

Ilulatua.
i P??fc*
Susub reigns at Babylon.

Ile

Susub reigns at Babylon.

I
[TO face

PAGE 162).

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

us

I(j3

in his days there were islands in the Persian Gulph

the names of Tylus or Tyrus, Aradus, and Doracta,1
bearing
identifies with
Dora ;2
latter name Mr. Kenrick
which
we
and in the voyage of Nearehus
read of
up the Gulph
all which
Sidodone, and Tarsia,3 on the coast of Carmania;
that

close commercial
indicates
intercourse between
sufficiently
the
"From
and
the
Persian
Gulph.
Gulph," observes
Tyre
"
commerce
to the we3tern
extended
their
Heeren,
they
*
and
the
of
island
of
India,
peninsula
Ceylon."
Tarsia we assume to be the Tarshish so frequently spoken
of in Scripture, and Tyre
of
is called by Isaiah "daughter
commerce
tbe
in
of
born
the
between
Tarshish
fact,
;"5 as,
mania,

The coast of Car

world.
Gulph and the Western
or Tarshish,
in the days of the opening of this com

merce,

when

Persian

distant

voyages

by

sea

were

unknown,

was

to which
the point on the Gulph
the trade by
probably
"
caravan from the far East?from
the ends of the earth "6?
was directed, and from thence distributed
up the Tigris and
to
the
cities
of
the
world.
We
learn from
Euphrates
great
our
era
in
ninth
that
of
the
tbe
town of
Al-Edrissi,
century
a
to
was
the
close
site
of
centre
of
Oriental
SirafF,
Tarsia,7
commerce which
extended
perhaps as far as China ;8 and
even

as

late

as

tbe

sixteenth

century,

when

the

Eastern

trade

had fallen
tomed
Ormuz

into the hands of the Portuguese,

who were accus
as far as the East Indies, the island of
to voyages

on

the

same

coast,

somewhat

nearer

to

tbe

mouth

of

the Gulph, which

superseded SirafF, was one of the principal
stations of their trade.
Thus tbe wealth
of India and the
"
distant East was transported in "ships of Tarshish
by way of
1
2 Kenriek's
3.
Strabo, xvi.
Phoenicia, p. 48.
3 Vincent's
of
358-302.
p.
Nearchus,
Voyage
4 lleeren's Manual
of Ancient
Eng. Trans, p. 27.
5 Isaiah xxiii. 10.
6 History,
Psalm
Ixxii.
7When
Jonah lied to Tarshish,
it was to the Persian
Gulph that he lied, not
iu Spain, as many suppose.
to Tartessus
He took ship
probably at Opis, on the
Tigris, a place so called by the Greeks, but which may have had the same deri
as
vation
It is a
Joppa, both being probably named by traders from the Gulph.
curious fact, as connected with Jonah, that some of the houses at Siralf are said
to have been built with the boues of whales,
the abundance of that tidh
showing
in the Persian Gulph.
8 Vincent's
of
365.
Nearchus,
p.
Voyage

164

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

the Euphrates

towards Tyre; while much of

through Babylonia
of Arabia, which was also poured into Tyre, we learn
was carried
of Gherrar
from Aristobulus
by the merchants
on the Arabian
side of the Gulph, on rafts up the Euphrates
to Thapsacus.1
and fifty miles below
About
two hundred
to Niebuhr,
there was a canal of five
Thapsacus,
according
to the
in length direct from tho Euphrates
hundred miles
Persian Gulph, which being a great work to keep in repair,
affords a strong indication of the extent of the traffic to and
the wealth

from the Gulph.2

This traffic of the Tynans
was
of the Persian
Gulph,

and tho islands

Tarshish,
in active operation nearly one
thousand years before the Christian
era, even in tho days of
whose wide
Solomon king of Israel and Judah, concerning
"
sea
to sea, and
from
dominion wo read, that it should reach
and
from the river (Euphrates) unto the ends of tho earth;"
"
and of the
to whom
it is declared,
the kings of Tarshish
the kings of Sheba and Seba shall
isles shall bring presents;
offer gifts."3
Solomon we know had a fleet
upon the
Hiram
sailors
tbe
of
Arabian Gulph, manned
king of
by
im
was
of
immense
which
annually
gold
Tyre,4 by
produce
on
in
But
addition
coast
Africa.
the
of
from
ported
Ophir,
with

to this fleet we read that he had also another fleet,5 expressty

an expression
understood
"a navy of Tarshish,"
by
as
a
the writer of the book of Chronicles6
navy trading to
"
which
(who
Tarshish,
navy of Hiram,"
together with the
does not appear to havo had a fleet on the Arabian Gulph,)
made once in three years a distant expedition, bringing back
a freight of gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks ; a sufficient
indication that this expedition was directed towards tbe East,
Some have sup
and not in the direction of the Mediterranean.
called

sailed from the Arabian

posed that this "navy of Tarshish"
it reached
of Arabia,
the
and
south
that, coasting
Gulph,
6ome distant point in the direction of India.
But it is hard
as the Tyrians, who
to believe
that such skilful navigators
1
Strabo, xvi. 3.
* Psalm lxxii.
* 2 Cbroil, ix. 21.

* 1
Kings

a Vincent's
Voyage
ix. 20, 27.

of Nearchus,
p. 514.
6 Ibid. x. 22.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

must

have been well

acquainted

with

the direct

165

route towards

the East

and whose ally and associate,

by the Euphrates,
Solomon, was in possession of all the country lying between
and who moreover
had built Tad
Tyre and the Euphrates,1
of the Euphrates,
three days'journey
mor, or Palmyra, within
with
the express object of encouraging
the commerce with
a
or
on
that
within
his own
river
port
Tipsah,
Thapsacus,
is hard, we say, to believe that two such skilful
was chiefly conducted
traders, in the days when navigation
by the tedious operation of rowing, could have so far erred, as
to have chosen a route towards the East more than a thousand
dominions?it

than that by the river Euphrates.

in length
greater
in conjunction "with
The very expression "navy of Tarshish,"
seems intended to
this fleet
the navy of Hiram,"
distinguish
which was merely
from that which was built at Ezion-geber,

miles

manned

with Tyrian

sailors, but not accompanied

by the fleet

of Hiram.
four hundred years later than the reign of Solomon,
i.e. about the year n.c. 560, we have an account in the book
in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar,
of the
of Ezckicl, written
At
very same traffic of the Tyrians with the Persian Gulph.
or Tarshish,
in Spain had been founded
this timo Tartcssus,
and silver, iron, tin, and lead were importod
by tho Tyrians,
About

But after describing

the traffic of the
from that colony.
on
to describe
western world with Tyre, Ezekiel
that
goes
with

the East,

in succession

naming

Damascus,

Ilaran,

Canneh,

at that time comprehending

all Mesopotamia,
Sheba, Asshur,
or
to
the
Chilmad,
Carmania,
Dedan,
according
Septuagint,
in the Gulph of Persia,2
and Raamah, both placed by Bochart
while the army of Tyre appears to have been composed partly
from Persia.
who had conquered
Nebuchadnezzar,
a
siege of thirteen years, and who had built Tere
Tyre after
of the Euphrates,
with
the view of
don,3 near the mouth
commerce
the
of
the
with
had
open
keeping
gulph
Babylon,
of recruits

possessed

himself

of the command

1 1
iv. 21-24.
Kinps
3 See
Vincent's Dissertation
* Euseb. Auch.
p. 28.

on the xxvii.

of the whole

chapter of Ezekiel.

traffic from

166

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

to Tyre, to the great enrichment of Babylon.

After
we still find Baal
the conquest of T}'re by Nebuchadnezzar,
over that city, who, we must presume,
had been
reigning
on
the
of
and
the
throne
about
by
forty
placed
Babylon;
king
that two kings in succes
years later we find from Menander
and Hiram, were called for from Babylon,
sion, viz., Merabal
to come and take
where probably they resided as hostages,
thence

The connexion
possession of the throne of Tyre.
was
that of subordination
two cities at that time

between the
on the part

of Tyre.
Again,
chadnezzar's

about

two hundred

invasion,

that

and

is, about

thirty
b.c

years
330,

after Nebu

Alexander

con

this great Eastern

trade into new
the idea of diverting
He
subdued Tyre after an obstinate
channels.
resistance,
and on his return to Babylon
from the East sought to make
that city the capital of his empire.
The Euphrates was still
for ships of considerable
size, and we find at this
navigable
same
the
connexion
of the fleets of Tyre with
the
period
ceived

as in former

learn from Arrian,1

that
days. Wc
common
to
and
the
ancient
must
which
practice,
according
have been adopted by Hiram
in the days of Solomon, and by
Ilukcus in the days of Sennacherib, Alexander
transported no
on
in
less than forty-seven
the
of camels,
backs
pieces,
ships

Euphrates

to Thapsacus, where
they were launched on the
some
to
carried
down
Euphrates
Babylon,
being of the
size of five bank of oars. Alexander
had constructed
at
a harbour capable of
one
thousand
bis
Babylon
holding
ships,
to conquer Arabia,
colonise the islands in the
object being
the trade of the East;
Persian Gulph, and monopolise
and in
the feverish contemplation
of this expedition ho was suddenly
overtaken by death.
connexion
Thus, then, we have traced a closo commercial
from Tyre

and

over a period of six

between Tyre and Babylon,
extending
hundred
and fifty years, during which
the whole
trade be
tween the eastern and western parts of the world was carried
through those two cities; and during part of which time Tyre
was in direct subjection
to Babylon,
from thence
receiving
1

Arrian,

vii.

19.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

I(j7

now return back to the particular

her kings. We
reign of
Ilula)us, in whose time it is quite clear that, so far from sub
to dictation from Babylon,
the kingdom
of Tyre was
mitting
in a position of such power and importance,
for a time at
least, as to have imposed princes, even upon that great city.
In the reign of Ilukeus, who was contemporary with Hezekiah,
of Tyre had reached the height
king of Judah, the prosperity
of its grandeur.
Isaiah, foretelling the destruction of the "joy
"
ous
at that time as princes,"
city," speaks of her merchants
"
"
her traffickers" as the honourable of the earth." These ex
pressions
imply great grandeur and riches on the part of her
to this, the prophet uses an expression
which
concerning Tyre
implies extended dominion and imperial
over
the precincts of
territories
far beyond
power, reaching
"
the little state.
is
the
crowning
Tyre
designated
city," or,
as otherwise
setter
the
crowns?the
of
translated,
dispenser
citizens.

But

in addition

and the direction in which her dominion had

up of kings;1
to have been towards
extended
is pretty clearly
indicated
From the Assyrian
Chaldea.
Inscriptions we learn that there
a
was on the Euphrates
the
strongly fortified city bearing
name

Tsur,

or

Tyre.2

In

the

same

chapter

of

Isaiah

which

the greatness and approaching

downfall of Tyre,
proclaims
as the stronghold
the prophet points out Chaldea
of her
off
denunciations
from
his
For,
greatness.
suddenly breaking
Behold the land of the Chaldeans
against Tyre, he exclaims?"
This people was not till the Assyrian
founded it for them
set
which dwell in the wilderness.
up the towers thereof
They
it to
and the palaces thereof.
He
(the Assyrian)
brought
ruin.

Howl,
ye ships of Tarshish,
(that is, ye ships which
the
Persian
trade with
for your strength
(that is
Gulph)
is laid waste."3
Chaldea)
This passage alone is sufficient to prove the occupation of
at this time by the fleets of Tyre.
But
the Euphrates
the
1When
to dethrone Ahaz, "and to set a kin? in
Rezin and Pekah
conspired
of Judith, "even tho son of Tabeal,"
Isaiah vii. 6, it seems probable
the midst"
that Tabeal
Tubaal) was a Tyrian prince.
(iju.
2 See ltawlinson's
map, Anc. Mon. vol. i.; and Journal of Sac. Lit., new series,
ix. p. 194.
3 Isaiah xxiii. 8-13.

168

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

of the Tyrian fleet is still more directly confirmed

presence
of
the authority
of Assyrian
by the testimony
inscriptions,
which
is decisive upon this point.
In the annals of Senna
cherib, recorded on Taylor's cylinder, we read, that this king,
who had conquered Tyre in his third campaign, when in pur
suit of his enemies, the Chaldeans,
about three years later,
who had taken refuge in the province of Elam, conducted his
army over "the great sea of the rising sun,"?the
Gulph of
"
to
that
is
in
those
Persia?in
very ships
say,
Syrian ships,"
so well accustomed
to tho
of Tarshish
spoken of bjr Isaiah,
of the Gulph, and so lately in tbe service of the
navigation
the loss of their
of Tyre:
now, however,
bewailing
And much
Sennacherib.
in
Chaldea, destroyed by
stronghold
cause had the
For
for
lamentation.
Sennacherib, we
Tyrians
are told, had built Tarsus on the coast of Cilicia, and called it
in
Tharsis or Tarshish,1
the name from Tarshish
borrowing
king

the Gulph,
forming the city after the fashion of Babylon;
and his views were now directed no doubt towards diverting
the trade from its original
route from the Gulph,
through
it up tho Tigris,
Babylon and Tyre, and directing
through
on
Niueveh,
favouring the new port of his own construction
the river Cydnus.
Up to this time tbe whole commerce of tho world, cast and
of Tyre and Chaldea, and
in the markets
west, had centered
tbe ships in which this trade was carried on were denominated
"
therefore, the position
Notwithstanding,
ships of Tarshish."
of the kingdom of Syria, with its capital Damascus,
standing
which city no doubt large
between Tyre and the Euphrates?to
cannot but conclude that
tribute was paid for safe conduct?we
and from thence
this vast trade by caravan to the Euphrates,
to Babylon
and the Persian Gulph, was as much under the
control of the merchant
princes of Tyre, as the overland
in connexion with the same Eastern
route through Egypt,
of enterprising
British
trade, is now under the direction
a
we
find
that
fortified
merchants.
therefore,
Considering,
on the Euphrates,
port established
bearing the name of Tyre
1 Et Tarsum
Tharsin.?Euseb.

urbeni, ipse ad 6iinilitudincm

Auch. p. 21.

Babylonis

condidit,

quam appcllavit

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

1G9

in the reign of Ilulaeus a powerful Tyrian fleet occu

that
of Tyre was such in
river?that
the pre-eminence
pied
as
the days of Ilukeus
to entitle that city to the designation

?that

or imperial city?and
that during
five years of
a
the same
Ilukeus at Tyre,
king bearing
on the
title, Ilukeus, was seated on the throne of Babylon,
lino of commerce which formed the source of his oAvn great

"crowning"
the reign

of

is not

riches?it

had

dominion

to assume

unreasonable

that

extended

short

that

the Tyrian
period even to

during
if Ilukeus of Tyre, and Ilukeus of
But
itself.
are one, then are the years of this king distinctly
Babylon
as
in b.c. 726-5,
before
and
fixed,
observed, as commencing
B.C.
in
689.
the identity of
whether
Moreover,
terminating
the kings be admitted or not, the chronological
is
argument

Babylon

almost

conclusive.

equally

For,

as we

have

seen,

the

acces

to the throne of Tyre must have taken place

within two or three years at most of the year B.C. 726, and his
fall therefore within two or three years at most of b.c. 689;
sion of Iluloeus

and when

concurrent
as the time

other

this latter date

that

the

year

n.c.

689

was

the

leads us expressly
testimony
of his fall, the just inference
actual

last

) _ar of his

reign,

to
is,
and

also the date of the third campaign of Sennacherib.

now from this
wc find that we have
Returning
digression,
far towards the completion of our inquiry.
For,
approached
therefore

having

already

ascertained

the dates

of

the

three

kings,
fixed
having
in the latter
now
reign, in connexion with the kingdom of Judah, it
only
event of a similar nature
remains to select some prominent
from the reigns of each of the other two kings,
together

Tiglathpileser,
with precision

and Sennacherib,
and
Sargon,
the date of one leading event

their dates, iu order to compare the chronology of tho

the reckoning
of Demetrius,
and of
Canon with
Assyrian
a
we
to
in
do
shall be able
TJssher. This
very few words.
the muti
Monsieur
Oppert has arranged and interpreted
from the Khorsabad
lated annals of the reign of Sargon,
with

from which we learn that

inscriptions now in the Louvre,
course of the second year after his accession,
the
in
Sargon
that is, in the course of the year b.c. 716-15,
captured the

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED,

170

city of Samaria, carrying away from thence 27,280 captives.

M. Oppert places the date of this event in the year B.C. 720,
before the accession of Sargon to the throne, with a view, no
of the date of the capture
doubt, to tho common reckoning
of Samaria
in the reign of Hoshea.
But
if, as M. Oppert
himself

in
has observed, Sargon's
twelfth year commenced
the archonship
of Mannu-itti-asshur-liha,
that is in tho year
b.c 706, his second jTear must have commenced
in the year
b.c 716, and have ended in b.c 715, about which time, there
fore,

was

Samaria

overthrown.

has been at much

to
pains
Again,
:?
annals
and
writes
the
of
arrange
disjointed
Tiglatbpileser,
"
I can distinguish,
at least
I think, from the inscriptions
three several campaigns in Southern Syria: the first extending
probably from the fourth to the eighth year of tho king"
Sir

(that
which
llczin

II. Rawlinson

is, from b.c 739 to 735 in our table) "and during

of Samaria, and
tribute was received from Mcnaheni
of Damascus

also

"?when

Hiram

was

reigning

on

the

throne of Tyre?"
the second some years later, perhaps about
b.c 733 (731 in our table) when the cities of Samaria wore
and the inhabitants were carried away into cap
plundered,
and
the third, which may have been a more continua
;
tivity
tion of the second, and which must have occupied a large
Thus?
portion of the remainder of the king's reign."1
took tribute of Menahcm,
say in his
Tiglatbpileser
738
fifth year.b.c
or. 715
Sargon captured Samaria in 716,
.
...
came up against Judaea in
Sennacherib
Such
compare

is the reckoning
these dates with

Canon.
tbe Assyrian
the reckoning of Demetrius.
of

Let

689
us

to tho record of Demetrius?

According
. . 737
b.c 746 to
Menahcm
reigned over Samaria from
Samaria was deprived of its native king for nine years in 715
came up against Judaea in.689
Sennacherib
now
of the Assyrian
let us compare the reckoning
And
Canon with the chronology of Ussher.
1

Athenooum,

August

22,

1863.

The Hebrew

and Ussher
with
Chronology
of Demetrius
compared
and with reference
to the Sabbatical
Canon,
years
of

Assyrian
Jews.

B.C.

Sab.

KiNoa of
NlNEVF.il.

I770
;
i
!

9
8
7
6

7
?
5
4
3
Sub. 2
1
750

Sab.

'

Snb.

Sab.

7
8
y
10
7G0 Pckahiah 1
8 i Pekah 1
2
3
4
6
fi

;
!
7
0
8
7
2

2 1Tiglathpileser
12
9

1 12
730 13 5

3
5

8 4
8 5 Takes tributeof Mcnabam,
7 6 king of Samaria. 10 6

13

Mcnahcm 1
-2
3
-1
li

5
4

the

Events selected fiiom Chuonolooy of ,Chronology ov

A_>MYRIA_N
IxfiC'RIFTIONS. DeMETIUUB. i
XJbSHEU.

4
3
2
I
Sab.

the

6Mcnobcm 1 13
S
4
Ahaz
17
6 2
740 3 7 3
9
6 7Pckahiah
5
4 9Pekah
3 10
2 11

17
82
19
2
3
4

5
8
10
11
12

11
12

H
!?
10
14
is
If,
18
19
20
"H
_ -6
a-t.%
ogg
_??
^.SMS

9
146 14
Hosbea 1
8 15 7 15 2
7 16 8 16 3
6 17 9
1 Ilezekiah
4
6 18
10 2 5
Sab.
4
19
11
3
6
3 20 12 4 7
2 21 IS 5 8
1 22
14 6 9
720 23
15 7
9 24
16
8
8
1
Ahaz
25
17 9
'
Sab.
7 26 Sargron
218 10
6
3
1
19 ll
5 2 Takes*Samaria. 4 20
12
5
4 3
13
6
3 4
14
2 75
*o _ 15
1 86
16
g??
Sab. 710 7
9
k
oSg
98
10
?*|g. 18
8 9U
-S3S
19
* ~ 20
127 10
6 11
13
21
51412 Hosbea 1 22
2 23
4 13
15
3
16
Sab. 3 14
24
4 25
I
2 15.1 Sennacherib
Ilezekiah
2 5 26
12
3 6
700
3
27
7 28
4
9
4
5
8 29
8
5
9
6
6 "
7
7
Sab. 6
8
8
9
4
9
10
3
10
11
2
11
1
12 12
13
690
9 14 Attacks Ilezekiah.
Sab.
14
15
Jubilee.8
16
16
7
6
17
17
18
5
18
19
4
19
20
3
20
Sub. 2
21
!21
22
1
22
680
2323
24
9
24
25
8
20
7
6 27'
28
5

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

to Ussher?
According
761
Menahem
ceased to reign in.b.c
721
Samaria was taken by Shalmanezer.
invaded Judtea in the fourteenth
Sennacherib

171

of

713

Hezekiah.

of Demetrius
is in
it appears, that the reckoning
the
the
unison
with
Canon, throughout
fifty years
perfect
and that the capture of
which wc have been examining,
Samaria by Sargon was concurrent with the fall of Pekah,
of Israel was
king of Israel, after whose reign the kingdom
not with tbe
for
nine
and
ruler
its
native
of
years,
deprived
differs from
fall of Iloshea; while the chronology of Ussher
or
the Canon to the extent of twenty-three
twenty-four years
But how, it will be asked, have the three Assyrian
in excess.
scholars treated these manifest difficulties ?

Thus,

it for granted
and Dr. Hincks,
that
taking
Oppert
and Clinton must be right in fixing the date of tbe
in the year n.c 721,
capture of Samaria by Shalmanezer
M.

Ussher

the capture of Samaria by Sargon,

begin first b}' torturing
into the capture of that city by Shalmanezer,
and take tbis
date of their reckoning.1
If this were
year as the fundamental
the true key to the adjustment of Assyrian
and Hebrew history,
we might
the
three
under
discussion,
expect,
reigns
during
of course, to find the several events recorded in the annals of
the two countries ranging
themselves
together without diffi
or collision.
an
is
It
evidence, therefore, that they have
culty
a
false
assumption, when Avefind that the adop
proceeded upon
tion of this date leads them into insuperable difficulties.
Thus,
if Samaria was conquered
the

last

with
But

year

year

of

of Menahcm

the forty-ninth
the

in 721,

b.c.

stands

which

Samaria,

of Uzziah,

761

in the sixth year of Hezekiah,

must

Avas concurrent

bave fallen

nineteen

years

in b.c 761.

before

tbe

acces

sion of Tiglathpileser,
who in his fourth or fifth year took
who is followed by
tributo of Menahcm.
Noav Dr. Hincks,
this difficulty
M. Oppert, boldly meets
tbe
by proclaiming
incompetency
1 Shalmanezer

of
was

the

transcribers

of

tbe Assyrian

Canon.

contemporary with So, or Sabaco, king of Egypt, who, ac

was not on the throne so early as n.c. 721.
Dr. Hincks
and
cording to Manetbo,
Prof. Rawlinson
accordingly alter the record of Manet ho to suit their purpose.

172

ASSYRIAN AND IIEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

In a recent

on the Egyptian
of Manetho,
dynasties
a
of
to
which
has
been
copy
presented
bearing date, 1863,
the Society, Dr. Hincks
As respects Sir Henry
writes:?"
Rawlinson's
document, but
Canon, this is not a cotemporary
a

treatise

by an unknown

person in the reign of

with
of
my restoration
inconsistenc)r
Asshurbanipal.
as
this
is
astronomical
observations,
Manetho,
by
supported
He charges the
proves that the compiler was a blunderer."l
names
the
therefore
with
of
compiler
omitting
thirty archons.
compilation

made

Its

is indeed a ready mode of getting rid of adverse testimony,

but is supported by no substantial argument.
On the contrary,
Sir II. Rawlinson
has frequently declared that there is not the
"When also we con
foundation
for any such idea.
slightest
sider that it must have been not one blunderer only, but four

This

of them living in
and incomrjetent scribes?one
independent
to omit the
the reign of Sennacherib?who
have combined
exact number of archons required by Dr. Hinck's
reckoning,
sees the
Sir Henry Rawlinson
the idea is simply incredible.
absolute necessity
of bringing
down the reign of Menahem
so as to range with the
and thus
early years of Tiglathpileser,
two
of
his
avoids
the false position
coadjutors.
Assyrian
Under the influence, however, of what wo consider to be a falso
Egyptian
reckoning, he fears to make the necessary alteration
of the same number of years in the following
reigns, and
of the reigns of
therefore an arbitrary arrangement
and Hoshea,
which he candidly con
Pekah, Ahaz,
arrives at the
fesses, "is open to many serious objections,,,
must have invaded Judaea both
conclusion
that Sennacherib

making
Jotham,

in the fourteenth

and twenty-seventh
years of Ilezekiah."2
to pursue Dr. Hincks
through the difficulties?over
to
which he
indeed
any ordinary controvertist?in
whelming
is involved by his assumption,
that Sargon's
capture of
after the siege
Samaria was that which followed
immediately
But

informs us that eight years after

by Shalmenezer.
Scripture
the fall of Samaria (in 721, as he supposes), in the fourteenth
b.c. 713, Sennacherib
came up against
year of Ilezekiah,
1
8 Egyptian Dynasties
Athenrcum, August

of Manctho,
22, 1863.

Part

i., p. 9.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED'

173

is found to be ten or eleven years

to the throne, according
of Sennacherib
same ready mode of avoiding
the diffi
as
case
of
the four
in
the
is,
therefore, again adopted,
culty
The
scribe?Avho
scribes.
Jewish
Avas, probably, no
Assyrian
less a person than Ezra himself?is
at once declared to be in
error, and the suggestion
is, that in three places in Scripture
we should
whero we read "fourteenth
year of Hezekiah,"
Judoea.

But

this date

beforo the accession

to the Canon.
The

amend

the reading to "twenty-seventh

of Hezekiah."
With
and ability of
for
the
respect
learning
unfeigned
Dr. Hincks,
who has performed
such invaluable
services in
and
the
before
the
materials
very
public
deciphering
laying
are
measure
we
our
to
in
enabled
found
Avhich
upon
great
Fcav, Avepresume, will be disposed to follow him iu
argument,
such a mode of proving
the consistency
of the Assyrian
Canon with the current Bible chronology.
Every attempt at
reconciliation
of the Canon AvithUssher's
dates, even in the
able hands which have undertaken
but
it, leads to nothing
or violation of authorities, hitherto
to be
supposed
of
be
it
dates
and
should
that
the
admitted
trust;
worthy
avc have attached
to the Assyrian
Canon have been
which
avc
it
clear
arrived
at,
is,
submit,
correctly
beyond question,
and his followers
of Ussher
is
that the HebrcAV chronology
rejection

antedated

Before
appears
connexion

to

the

extent

of

twenty-three

or

twenty-four

years.

avc conclude, let us advert to a great difficulty which

to overhang
the Assyrian
Canon, whether viewed in
Avith

the

of Ussher

chronology

or Demetrius,

viz.,

"
that the name of Shalmanezer,
Avho plays
king of Assyria,"
so prominent a part in Scripture
in the overthrow of Samaria,
is not included amongst the kings named in the Canon.
The
necessary

inference

seems

to

be,

either

that

he

Avas a

subor

amongst the sovereign

prince, not counted at Nineveh
rulers of Assyria, Avhich is apparently inconsistent Avith Avhat Ave
read concerning him in Scripture, or that he Avas identical Avith

dinate

one of the kings named in the Canon. We

cannot ignore his
is correct, tbe
existence
of Demetrius
; and if the reckoning
ten tribes were carried away by tbis king into captivity four
hundred and seventy-three
years and nine months before the

174

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

that is in the year n.c. 696-5.l

reign of Ptolemy Philopator,
But if this be so, then must Shalmanezcr
have reigned over
same
course
in the
of the
Assyria
years which the
twenty-four
Canon assigns to the reign of Sennacherib.
Now
Assyrian
wTe have
an
that
there
is
blank
in
observed
already
apparent
the reign of Sennacherib
of ten years, during which nothing
is
him ; and Ave have also observed
that
recorded concerning
into association
Sargon must have taken his son Sennacherib
with him on the throne before he had himself ceased to reign.
Are we then driven to the conclusion
that Sargon,
Senna
all reigned
in Assyria
cherib, and Shalmanezcr
together?
This would
indeed bo a strange conclusion to arrive at. No,
the probable
in his fifteenth
inference
is, that when Sargon
fit to take his son Sennacherib
into
year, n.c. 702, thought
the government,
he himself
assumed the ancient and well
known title Shalmanezcr.
That Shabnanczcr
and Sennacherib
were on the throne at the same time, appears to be
placed be
yond question by the contemporary writings of Hosca.
Speak
of Samaria, which wc know
ing of the impending destruction
took place after a three years' siege by Shalmanezer,
"when the
king of Israel shall be utterly cut oiF," the prophet writes?"all
thy fortresses shall be spoiled, as Shalman spoiled Bcth-arbcl."2
comments have been made upon this passage;
but,
Strange
we are of
with Rosenmiiller,
that
Shalman
here
opinion
signifies
no other than Shalman-ezer,
by whom Samaria was beseiged.
But if so, this Shalman was reigning
in the time of Senna
cherib.
For in the same chapter of Hosea which speaks of
and with reference
to the destruction
of Samaria,
Shalman,
and the calf, that is the golden calf, of Bethavcn worshipped
it shall also be carried
by the ten tribes, the prophet writes?"
into Assyria,
for a present to king larch."
To no other king
fall
of Samaria, can
of
the
the
about
time
of Ass}_ia,
living
or San-akh
this appellation be applied, except to Sennacherib,
1 " Demetrius
Ihe kings of Judra, "that from the
says," in his work concerning
to the reign of tho
the ten tribes were carried away from Samaria,
time when
was a period of live hundred and
fourth Ptolemy,
(read four hun
seventy-three
and nine months, and from the carrying away from
dred and seventy-three
years)
three hundred ana thirty-eight
Alex.
Jerusalem
years and three months."?Clem.
Heinsii.
Strom, i. p. 337.
2 Hosca x.
14, 15.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

175

that, in fact, we are here told that Shalmanezer

shall present the golden calf of Samaria as a trophy to Senna
cherib.
and Sargon were one, is supported
that Shalmanezer
Again,

Jareb.

So

same acts which the

by the fact, that the
Tyrian annals appro
were
to
Shalmanezer
priate
actually performed
by Sargon.
now in the Berlin Museum,
is a statue of Sargon
Thero
a city not far
brought from Idaliuni in the island of Cyprus,
tbat Sargon, Avho usually set up his
from Citium, proving
image to mark his conquests, had brought under subjection
the Citians;
and these are the very people which are spoken
of in the Tyrian annals as subdued by Shalmanezer.
M. Oppert, on the assumption
that Shalmanezer
reigned in
b.c 721,
before
the
of
discusses
the ques
just
reign
Sargon,
tion of the possible identity of Sargon and Shalmanezer,
and
on
no
the
decides
who
that
had
justly
against it,
king
ground
once borne the title Shalmanezer,
one of the ancient and revered
re
titles of the Assyrian
Avould have aftenvards
monarchy,
corded

the actions of his first fifteen years under the title

or
But place tbe reign of Shalman
king dc facto.

Sargon,
ezer,

with

ment
assumed

years
Assyrian

about

Demetrius,

is reversed.
the

ancient

For

the

year
tho

n.c

696,

Sargon,
plebeian,
title
when
Shalmanezer,

of Avarlike exploits

lie had

and

the
Avell

may
after

firmly seated himself

argu
have
fifteen

on the

throne.

The assumption, then, is not unreasonable,

that Shalmanezer
and Sargon Avere one and the same king ; and this, if avc come
to consider, is exactly what may be inferred from the words
of one who AArasliving at Nineveh
in the reign of Shalmanezer.
are
treat
to
the book of Tobit as unhistori
Many
disposed
contained in it; and
cal, owing to the legend and superstition
Sir I. NcAvton, and the
Prideaux,
yet such men as Ussher,
late Mr. Fynes Clinton, have by no means
looked upon it as
unhistorical.
Now Tobit, the Jewish captive, who had been
carried to Nineveh
that is, Shal-cnemessar,
by Enemcssar,
tells us that he Avas purveyor to that king.
king of Assyria,
No one, therefore, could be better qualified
to inform us of
the relationship
to the king, and his testi
of Sennacherib

17G

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

"
For he tells us that, when
niony goes directly to the point.
was dead, Sennacherib,
Enemessar
in his
his son, reigned
was father
to Sennacherib,
stead."
If, then, Enemessar
and

Sargon

Enemessar

were

one.

For

Sennacherib,

un

was

the son of Sargon.

questionably,
the expression of Abydenus,
And now we can understand
when
of
observes that ho was the
Sennacherib,
who,
speaking
"
of
and
twenty-fifth
yet
king
Assyria,
scarcely to bo reckoned
seated on the throne
amongst the kings."
Though nominally
as
n.c.
as early
the year
702, two unimportant
campaigns form
the only record of the thirteen first years of his reign; while
that time
the burthen and tho glory of tho kingdom during
seems to have been sustained by the energy of his father
as before observed,
Shalmauezer.
Copy No. 1 of the Canon,
as holding
office till the
does not even recognise Sennacherib
his father, leaving but
of the throne; and during
to
the empire seems much
was inmate in his father's
came to the throne on the
we
he
that
when
learn,
palace,1
"
his estate was troubled," so
death of his father Enemessar,
"
and from
could not go into Media;"
that the writer
that is
we
in
the
of
that
learn
Sennacherib,
reign
Jpscphus2
nineteenth

year of his association

six years for his sole occupation
of
those few years the greatness
have Buffered. From one who

with

in the year n.c. 688, as we have

off the yoke of Assyria,
Of these
government.
kingly

shown, the Medtte

set up for themselves
of
adverse events nothing,
The campaigns
of the king.

shook

course,

is recorded

in the annals

elsewhere
and

and Samaria, conducted by Shal

against Tyre, and Cyprus,
was
Sennacherib
must
have
taken
mauezer,
place while
and even
quietly taking his ease in his palace at Nineveh;
when in his fourteenth year he roused himself to take part in
so flatteringly
described
successive
by his
campaigns,
must
one
he
at
least
we
them
of
that
from
know
annalist,
lost
the
have returned in disgrace to Assyria,
greatest
having
six

against
army in the disastrous
expedition
and Egypt.
His devotional
tendencies and inactive
even to the Jewish
seem to have been known
disposition

portion
Palestine

of his

1 i.
Tobit,

15.

Joseph.

Ant.

x. ii.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGYCOMPARED.

177

of
the impending destruction
who, when foretelling
of
selects
the
the
warlike
sword
Shalmanezer,
by
from the anticipated
the golden calf
spoils of the campaign
or Bethel,
of Bethaven,
the idol of Samaria, as the most
appropriate and acceptable present for king Jareb in Assyria,
who at the same time is by no means referred to as about to
prophet,
Samaria

and
take part in the hazards of the campaign.
Building
seems
to
architecture
have occupied much of his attention,
in the sculptures seated
and we find Sennacherib
represented
in a chair superintending
the operations connected Avith the
of his palace.
His inactive and devout disposition,
building
or infirmity,
whether
from indolence
however,
proceeding
was ill calculated to command the obedience of his
subjects in
the tumultuous
times upon which he had fallen;
and ac
the
after
and
after an
province of Media,
losing
cordingly
other serious revolt of the province of Babylon,
ending after
to the
many years by the accession of the warlike Esarhaddon
in revolt or in support of his father we are
throne?Avhether
not informed?we
find his tAvo sons Adrammelec
and Sharezer
their opportunity
Avhilc
conspiring against him, and watching
the king Avasworshipping
in the house of Nisroek
his god,
smiting him Avith the SAVord, thus terminating
ignominiously
his short and inglorious reign.
We have now shown by three several instances, draAvn from
the respective
reigns of Tiglatbpileser,
Sargon, and Senna
are at variance
how
the
dates
of
Ussher's
cherib,
chronology
Canon to the extent of at least twenty
with the Assyrian
three years in excess, and hoAV, on the other hand, the reck
is in perfect accordance with the dates of
oning of Demetrius
the Canon. We
have also shown how the capture of Samaria
to Scripture, must have
which,
by Shalmanezer,
according
taken place in the reign of the Assyrian
king Jareb, is by
of Demetrius
the reckoning
placed in the reign of Senna
the
cherib, proving again
consistency of that reckoning both
with the Canon and Scripture.
But if Ussher's
chronology
must thus be rectified to the extent of twenty-three
years be
tAveen the years b.c 740 and 680, a similar rectification would
appear

to be required

VOL. 1.?[NKW

ftRIUF.8].

both
12

in the preceding

and succeeding

178

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

error is
out how this continuous
and in pointing
centuries;
found to exist throughout
the times of the Jewish monarchy,
we are led to one or two
points in history which
interesting
in the present
have formed the subject of much controversy
of Hebrew
chro
the proposed rectification
day, and which
nology seems to set at rest.
AVc havo elscwhero already shown how, according to Poly
bius and other authorities,
the colony of Carthage was founded
in the year b.c. 846, and how according
to Josephus and the
was
the
of
the
annals
foundation
Tyrian
temple of Jerusalem
laid just one hundred
and forty-four years before that date,
n.c.
in
is
the year
990, being twenty-two
years lower
to that event by TJssher, and in per
than the date assigned
fect agreement with the reckoning of Demetrius.1
the king whose annals are recorded on the black
Again,
and who is styled Shalmanezer
obelisk in the British Museum,
II. by Sir Henry Rawlinson,
reigned, according to the Assyrian
n.c. 856 to 823, and the date
from
Canon, thirty-four years,
of his reign is, as we have said, as securely fixed as any of the
Now Sir Henry has
early reigns of the Canon of Ptolemy.
out
of
that
Damascus,
Hazael,
contemporary
king
pointed
of Jehu, king of Israel, came to the throne in the fourteenth,
year of this king's reign, that is in B.C. 843 ; and Jehu is also
that

as
represented on the obelisk
having sent tribute to this king.
But the accession of Jehu to the throne of Israel is placed by
There is no means of determin
TJssher in the year B.C. 884.
the reign of Jehu
the number of years which
ing precisely
must be lowered with reference to the reigns of Shalmanezer
we
But if we adopt the reckoning of Demetrius
and Hazael.
shall find that this historian again forms a perfect link between
Canon.
Scripture and the Assyrian
If we now descend
to the year B.C. 610, we fall upon an
astronomical controversy, which has lasted now about fifteen
the true date of the eclipse of Thales. Every
years, concerning
one is aware that many important events in ancient history,
of
the rise of the kingdom
such as the fall of Nineveh,
of
the
of
the
Cyrus king of
grandfather
Babylon,
marriage
1 Trans.

Chron.

Inst.,

vol.

ii., part Hi., p. 42.

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

179

soon
Persia, and especially the death of Necho king of Egypt,
after the battle of Carchemish,
in
the
first
year of
fought
cluster
round
Nebuchadnezzar
of
the
date of
Babylon,
king
this

been placed by modern

has generally
B.c
in
610.
the Astronomer Royal
Now
the
year
chronologists
we know has proved,
in two papers read before the Royal
eclipse,

which

to this eclipse by
that the ancient date attached
Society,
b.c
true
585, is the
date; thus placing
Pliny and others, viz.,
all the events connected with it just twenty-five
years loAver
than by the common reckoning,
and again in accordance
with
of Demetrius,
who places the first of
the reckoning
in b.c 582.
is Avell aware tbat
Dr. Hincks
Nebuchadnezzar
his arrangement
of Egyptian
fall to the
chronology must
if
record
of
is
confirmed
the
astronomical
ground
Pliny
by
and we find him therefore vehemently
reckoning;
opposed to
and
that
the
the Astronomer Royal,
lunar tables
demanding
set forth by Hansen may, be tested by the record of certain
to which he refers. Mr.
lunar eclipses of ancient history
on
who
tested his theory by re
the
has
other
hand,
Airy,
ference to tho recorded solar eclipses of ancient times, declares
that every total solar eclipse is at least fifty times as valuable as
any lunar eclipse, and that a total eclipse of the sun is at least
ten

as

times

as

accurate

any

other

eclipse

of

the

sun

Avhen

applied as a test of the accuracy of the lunar tables. Here

then, again, we find about the same number of years required
to be loAvered in the sixth century b.c as we have already
found

in the eighth

Descending
a controversy
earnest

and

and tenth.

again
which
conscientious

century b.c, we
the minds
is noAV agitating

to the fifth

writers,

viz.,

the

question

fall upon
of many
of

the

of this
The writer
of the book of Daniel.
authenticity
to have lived in the reign
book wo aro aware professes
and tells us that he was
of Darius
the son of Ahasuerus,
some show of
Yet not without
first minister
of that king.
For
reason, this book is declared to be a spurious production.
so
as long as it is beset Avith the chronology
of Ussher,
long
shall we search in vain for the great king Darius whom
Aveare taught
and as for Ahasuerus,
Daniel calls his master;

180

ASSYRIAN AND HEBREW CHRONOLOGY COMPARED.

this title represented not only

also Astyages,
but
is
correct,
Cambyscs, and
Cyaxares,
one
or
most cautious
of
the
Artaxerxes.
Rosenmiiller,
Xerxes,
of these writers, accuses the author of this book of confound
son of Ahasuerus
with the reign of
ing the reign of Darius
son
Bunscn
and
while
Darius
of Hystaspes;
others, finding
that the book of Daniel
Greek words in the text, declare
earlier than the reign of Darius
could not have been written
to believe

that the Jews under

which

son of Hystaspes.
Here again if we lower the reckoning of
For
about twenty- five years all difficulty disappears.
us
to
as
leads
Darius
Demetrius
of
the
infer,
thus,
reckoning
and
the master of Daniel becomes Darius the son of Hystaspes;

Ussher

thus again the record of Joseph us, that Ezra's return to Jerusa
lem was in the seventh year of the reign of Xerxes, and the tra
that this return was in the
dition preserved by Maimonides,
of the second temple, is in
year of the building
informs us that
which
of
the
book
with
Daniel,
harmony
"
that expression may
whatever
the kingdom,"
Darius
took
that is in the year
signify, when about the age of sixty-two,
n.c. 493, and laid the foundation of the second temple in the
thirteenth

following year.
Much yet remains to be done in the adjustment of Persian
Some materials,
how
to the altered reckoning.
chronology
been
laid
the
have
before
this
towards
ever,
purpose
already
we
thus
And
Rawlinson.
may hope
Society by Sir Henry
of the
that the foundation has been laid for a rectification
a
for
whole range of Asiatic
period of nearly
chronology
nineteen hundred years before the Christian era; to the hon
our of the Society which has laid before the world so many
new historical
facts in Asiatic
history, and to the immortal
member
of the Society who has
of the distinguished
and
rescued these materials,
especially the precious relic which
we have now been considering,
literally from the dust.
fame