27. §1. Chronological Survey

§1. Chronological Survey IN no part of sacred history is chronology of greater importance than here. The view taken by each one of the condition of the Israelites during this period must be essentially different, according as he comes to the conclusion that the contents of 1 Samuel 1-7 run parallel with those of Judges 11-16, so that the two one-sided accounts supplement each other; or assumes that they both refer to different times, and Eli first attained the dignity of high priest after Samson was already dead, or, as some believe, a considerable period later, so that between the judges and Samuel there would be a gap, a space of time of which we know nothing at all. We must therefore begin with the chronology. This question has been considerably facilitated by Keil, in his chronological examination concerning the years which elapsed between the exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt and the building of the temple of Solomon, in the Dorpater Beiträgne zu den theologischen Wissenschaften, 2d vol., Hamburg 1833, p. 303 ff., which has its best analogy among the ancients in the close translation and acute examination of the different views by Vitringa in the Hypotyposis hist, sacrce, p. 29 sqq. The intermediate researches of Joh. Dav. Michaelis have only served to complicate the matter. Bertheau also, in his Commentary on the Book of Judges, Leipzic 1845, and Ewald, in utter ignorance of the researches of Keil, have only obscured the question by a multitude of new chronological fancies.

We have a firm starting-point for chronological inquiry in 1 Kings 6:1, according to which 480 years elapsed between the exodus of Israel out of Egypt and the building of Solomon’s temple. It cannot be the task of the chronologist to harmonize this statement with that made by St. Paul in Acts 13:20, in a discourse which he held in the synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia, where he makes the period of the Judges to have lasted only 450 years. Vitringa supposes that the chronological statements in the apostle’s discourse are glosses interpolated afterwards in an unsuitable place. This view is based on the fact that the chronological determination in Paul is merely a passing one. For the apostle’s object, accuracy was not demanded: he was not called upon to oppose and correct the chronological view then prevalent. For him, it was enough to give the historical view—a general chronological substratum. A century more or less was of no importance to him. That he has no intention of encroaching on the sphere of the chronologists, and putting them in fetters, he expressly declares by the ὡς, towards, about, which takes away the support from all those who make his statement the starting-point of chronological calculations, and likewise from those who charge the apostle 1 with a chronological error. The 450 years exactly agree with the numbers of the book of Judges from the first slavery to the death of Eli, recorded in the books of Samuel, which it was then the custom to reckon together, without considering that some of the periods might run parallel and thus include one another. Hence our only task is to bring the general chronological statement in the books of Kings into harmony with the particular determinations in the historical books. The following reasons make it necessary to disclaim a chronology definite and accurate in every single point:—1. Some chronological data are entirely wanting in the Old Testament, viz. the determination of the time which elapsed from the first division of the land of Canaan to the first hostile oppression—that of the Mesopotamians. Likewise the statement of the year of Samuel’s judgeship and Saul’s reign. 2. On glancing at the chronological accounts of the book of Judges, we are at once struck with the circumstance that the numbers are so often round, more frequently than is generally the case in chronologically accurate history. Half of the numbers are of this kind, such as 10, 20, 40, 80, 7. But this discovery only attains its full significance when placed in connection with the whole historical character of the book of Judges. Taking this fact into consideration, it appears to us à priori improbable that it was the author’s intention to give a chronology accurate to the year and day. For this the author is far too little of a chronicler, far too much of a prophet. Studied chronological precision would be at variance with the care with which in the historical representation he leaves out everything not subservient to his main object. These defects, however, are of comparatively small importance. The periods left indefinite are but few—only the two already mentioned; and even with regard to them, we have data which enable us to form an approximate determination. Nor must we allow the round numbers in the book of Judges to lead us astray. For in the definite numbers which are mixed up with them, such as 18, 22, 23, we have a guarantee that they are only put there when the definite number came very near the round one—40, for example, for 39 or 41; and this want of precision can exercise the less influence upon the whole, since the too much and the too little almost balance one another when such a course is pursued for a long period.

We shall now turn to particulars, beginning with a chronological survey, and then going on to discuss the various difficult and doubtful points. The 480 years are divided thus:— The time from the exodus out of Egypt to the death of Moses, . . . . . 40 years. From the death of Moses to the distribution of the land (compare the earlier observation) , . . . . . 7 years. To the invasion of the Mesopotamians, . . . . . 10 years. From the beginning of the bondage to the Mesopotamians to the death of Jair, the separate dates in the book of Judges, Judges 3:8 to Judges 10:3, together amount to 801 years. So that from the exodus out of Egypt to the death of Jair we get a sum-total of 358 years.

We now find in the book of Judges a series of parallel dates, Israel being attacked simultaneously by the Ammonites in the east and by the Philistines in the west. We shall here follow the latter chronological stream. The oppression by the Philistines lasted in all 40 years; comp. Judges 15:20. Of these, the first 20 years are the last 20 of the 40 years’ priesthood of Eli. The acts of Samson belong to the last 20. The period ends with the victory over the Philistines under Samuel. These 40 years added to the 358 make 398.

Hence there still remain 82 years of the sum-total. Of these, 40 belong to the reign of David, and 3 to the reign of Solomon until the building of the temple. Thus we get a remainder of 39 years for the judgeship of Samuel and the kingship of Saul.

Let us now turn to the other chronological series. The oppression by the Ammonites lasted 18 years, according to Judges 10:8. Jephthah was judge for 6 years, Ebzan for 7, Elon 10, Abdon 8. The whole series makes 49 years. They came to an end in the time of Samuel’s judgeship. Jephthah’s appearance takes place under the pontificate of Eli, shortly before the appearance of Samson. The victory over the Philistines under Samuel takes place in the last year of the judge Elon. We shall now consider separate particulars.

1. Many have thought it necessary to lengthen the time between the (first) distribution of the law and the invasion of the Mesopotamians (Bertheau, for example, computes the time from Joshua’s death to the invasion of the Mesopotamians at forty years), from misapprehension of the passage Joshua 24:31, and Judges 2:7, according to which the Israelites served the Lord as long as Joshua lived, and the elders, who lived long after Joshua. These words are not to be so misapprehended as to lead us to suppose that the Israelites were absolutely faithful to the Lord up to the moment when the last of the elders died, and were absolutely unfaithful from the time that his eyes were closed. They are not inconsistent with the fact that the depravity had already begun to germinate in the last years of Joshua, and in a short space of time acquired so much power that punishment became necessary. This punishment does not presuppose the complete apostasy of the whole nation, but rather implies the contrary by its mildness and short duration. Here also we see how perilous it is to reason immediately from the universal to the particular. That the period cannot have been much longer, appears with certainty from the fact that Othniel, who set Israel free after eight years’ bondage, was a valiant hero already in Joshua’s day, at the time of the occupation of the land; comp. Joshua 15:17, Judges 1:13.

2. Throughout the whole period from the invasion of the Mesopotamians to the death of Jair, the chronological reckoning proceeds quite simply. One date does not cover another. The events are all narrated in chronological succession. Only the victory of Shamgar over the Philistines occurs in the intermediate period between the Moabitish and the Canaanitish oppression, in which Israel on the whole enjoyed rest, as appears from the circumstance that Judges 3:31 neither gives the date of this act of heroism, nor records the fact that Shamgar judged Israel.

3. The most important questions relate to the time towards the end of the period of the judges. First, whether the oppression of the Philistines succeeded that of the Ammonites, or whether they were simultaneous. We decide unhesitatingly in favour of the latter view. Judges 10:7 speaks decidedly for it. We are first told how the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord, and especially how they served the gods of the Philistines and of the Ammonites; and then we read: a And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and He sold them into the hands of the Philistines, and into the hands of the children of Amnion.” Then there follows a full account of the oppression by the Ammonites, Israel’s repentance, and their deliverance by the hand of Jephthah, Judges 10:11 to Judges 11:33. Judges 13-16 are occupied with what the Israelites had to suffer from the Philistines, and with the help vouchsafed to them by the Lord. If the oppression by the Philistines had only occurred after that by the Ammonites, how could the author put them together, as he does in Judges 10:7, even placing that by the Philistines first? That the oppression of the Philistines in Judges 10:7 is not distinct from that in Judges 13-16 is self-evident. For if they be separated, it follows that in the first oppression by the Philistines we have no account whatever of the subsequent course of events, or of the saving mercy of the Lord, which is quite at variance with the character of the book, whose author in the very introduction represents the merciful deliverances as the object of his writing, no less than the righteous oppressions, and who elsewhere records sin, punishment, repentance, and deliverance, in regular succession, observing the same course even in the Ammonitic invasion.

4. If the beginning of the oppression by the Philistines be definitely fixed, the question arises as to its end. Its duration is set down at forty years in the book of Judges. These forty years, however, reach beyond the events which are recorded in the book of Judges. For Samson, with whose death the book of Judges concludes, was only beginning to deliver Israel, Judges 13:5; he judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years, Judges 15:20. When he dies, the power of the Philistines is still unbroken; his deeds were rather proofs that the God of Israel could deliver His people, prophecies of future deliverance, than themselves calculated to effect it. If we now turn from the book of Judges to the contiguous books of Samuel, we find ourselves here again upon the same ground on which the author of the book of Judges left us. In Judges 4 we find the Philistines at war with the Israelites; and the misfortune of the latter reaches its highest point in the fact that the ark of the covenant is taken by the Philistines,—an event in consequence of which Eli dies. There can be no doubt that the oppression of the Philistines, to which this battle belongs, is the same of which the book of Judges treats; for otherwise the one would want a beginning, the other an end. But the oppression by the Philistines in the books of Samuel lasted twenty years after that catastrophe. It was brought to an end by the great victory which the Lord gave to the Israelites, after they had earnestly turned to Him under the influence of Samuel, 1 Samuel 7:14 Sam. 7:14. According to this determination, the last twenty years of the forty years of Eli’s priesthood fall in the time of the oppression by the Philistines; the last twenty years of the oppression by the Philistines, which are left quite void in the books of Samuel, are filled out by the deeds of Samson narrated in the book of Judges. According to Judges 13:5, the Philistines reigned over Israel already at the time of Samson’s birth. While still a youth, Samson began his exploits, Judges 14:4. Assuming his age to have been twenty years, the end of his twenty years’ judgeship, which began with the death of Eli, borders on the beginning of Samuel’s judgeship, which was based on the decisive victory over the Philistines. Thus everything was in the most beautiful order. For the space of twenty years, the second half of Eli’s pontificate, Israel is in complete subjection. At the end of this time the climax of misfortune is reached by the taking away of the ark of the covenant. Then Israel rises again. For twenty years Samson makes the Philistines feel the ascendency of the God of Israel, supplemented by the reformatory activity of Samuel, which prepares the way for a lasting and complete victory. This victory takes place immediately after Samson’s death. At the time when Israel’s hope is carried to the grave with Samson, it re-awakens more gloriously with Samuel. The objections which have been brought against this arrangement may easily be set aside. It has been thought strange that nothing is said of Eli in the book of Judges; nothing of Samson in the books of Samuel. To this objection the true answer has been given by Joach. Hartmann, Chronol. S. 157: “Eli non nominatur in historia judicium, quia ipsi cum militia; Simson non nominatur in libris Samuelis, quia ipsi cum ecclesia et Samuele nihil negotii fuit.” Notwithstanding the clear and definite statement at the very beginning of the book of Judges, it has been too often forgotten that it was throughout not the author’s intention to give a complete history of this period, but that he only occupies himself with a certain class of events, with the acts of the judges in a limited sense, the men whose authority among the people had its foundation in the outward deliverances which the Lord vouchsafed to the nation by their instrumentality. In this sense Eli was by no means a judge, although in 1 Samuel 4:18 it is said that he judged Israel for forty years. Eli was high priest, and merely exercised over the affairs of the nation a more or less extended free influence, which had its origin in his priestly dignity. Hence the author of the book of Judges had nothing to do with Eli; and we are not at liberty to conclude, from the fact that he does not mention him, that Eli’s activity was no longer felt in the time of which he treats. And the author of the books of Samuel had just as little to do with Samson. His attention is fixed on Samuel, whose activity stood in no relation to that of Samson, had nothing whatever to do with it; and he mentions Eli only because his history was so closely interwoven with that of Samuel. If this be apprehended, the second objection disappears of itself. According to this view, the first book of Samuel was not so much a continuation of the history, as a partial repetition of that which belonged to the period described by the book of Judges. The book of Samuel takes up the thread of the history where the author of the book of Judges lets it fall, towards the end of the forty years’ oppression by the Philistines, in 1 Samuel 7. But it was not enough for the author’s aim to describe the new formation of things as established by Samuel, without repeating certain preparatory events which the author of the book of Judges had no object in communicating. Before narrating the decisive appearance of Samuel, he feels it necessary to make us acquainted with his personality and the circumstances of his appearance. It is clear that the author only speaks of Eli with reference to Samuel, from the whole manner of his representation. The most important events—for example, the manner in which the high-priesthood passed over from the family of Eleazar to that of Ithamar—he entirely omits. Finally, it has been objected that, according to this computation, the activity of those judges named in the book of Judges after the oppression of the Ammonites would coincide with the judgeship of Samson, and in part with that of Samuel. But this objection is based on an unhistorical conception of the office of judge. The judges were judges in Israel, each one belonged to the whole nation; but none was judge over all Israel, with the exception of Othniel in the very beginning of the period: most of them acted only among single tribes, or among a few neighbouring tribes. The judges enumerated in Judges 12:8-15 acted only among the eastern and northern tribes, which were not involved in the oppression of the Philistines.

5. The only point of controversy which now remains is the determination of the length of Samuel’s judgeship, which began with the end of the oppression by the Philistines, soon after the death. of Samson; and of Saul’s kingship. With regard to this we have no definite and explicit statements. That it is not possible to go much beyond the thirty-nine years at which we have already estimated this time, nor to attribute forty years to the reign of Saul alone, by reason of the general statement in Acts 13:21, which probably includes both Samuel and Saul, appears from the combination of several circumstances, for which we must refer to Keil, S. 358 ff., since the chronology here has not grown together with the history, as in the former examinations. As a guarantee for the correctness of our chronological calculation, we have not only 1 Kings 6:1, but also a second passage, Judges 11:26, where Jephthah says that Israel dwelt in the land east of the Jordan, conquered in the last year of Moses, for 300 years, until he fought against Amnion. Our calculation gave 318 years from the death of Moses to that of Jair, after which came the Ammonitic invasion. Bertheau is obliged to confess that his chronological computation stands in glaring opposition to these two general statements, and in so doing has passed judgment on it. From the exodus out of Egypt to the building of the temple he calculates more than 600 years. This large number of years he gets by calculating, on his own responsibility, forty years for “the sinful generation after Joshua,” by denying the synchronism of the Ammonitic and the Philistic oppression, and extending the judgeship of Samson, which he estimates at forty instead of twenty years, beyond the oppression by the Philistines.