All chronology is here obviously out of the question from the palpably defective state of the individual numbers. Add to which that from Moses to Gideon, all the numbers recorded are either 40 or twice 40 (40+40 +80+40): and in like manner from Samson to David are either 40 or 20 (20+40 +20 +40). The intermediate numbers on the other hand are more definite, as are most of the dates for the duration of hostile supremacy. 132 Was there any fixed system of chronology running parallel to these dates? If so, on what could it be based? Let us examine the sum total for our period.

It is stated in the 2nd Book of Kings-according to the Hebrew text-with reference to the foundation of Solomon's Temple, that up to that time, consequently up to the fourth year of Solomon, 480 years had elapsed since the Exodus. The Septuagint version gives 440 years. This latter account is altogether irreconcilable with the dates above recapitulated-for the numbers there given, exclusive of those of foreign supremacy, amount to 442 years. It has, however, obviously the appearance of a round number, formed out of the sum total of those separate specific dates. It may, however, on that very account, be unhesitatingly rejected as spurious, as an arbitrary adjustment of dates in themselves to all appearance inaccurate, and certainly incomplete. The only remaining number, therefore, not liable to suspicion, is the 480: and that, perhaps, only because we have no insight into the mode in which it is made up. May we venture to assume that it is a tradition

132 Studer's hypothesis, that the list of the Judges is not historically arranged, but rather of a geographical character according to their birthplaces, is not worth refuting. It is actually contradicted by the statements given above of the birthplaces of the separate Judges. But the whole historical contents of this part of Scripture prove, moreover, that their order is intended to be chronological.

based on the years of the High Priests of the Tabernacle, the only possible clue which here offers itself for a connected chronology?

II. LENGTH OF THE PERIOD FROM MOSES TO JOSEPH, OR, OF THE SOJOURN OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL IN EGYPT.

1. THE Prophecy to Abraham, Genesis xv. 12-17. "And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and lo! an horror of great darkness fell upon him. him. And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in the land that is not theirs, and shall serve them, and they shall afflict them 400 years. And also that nation whom they shall serve, will I judge; and afterwards shall they come out with great substance. And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace, thou shalt be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full."

years

In this passage it will be observed the time specified is merely that during which the posterity of Abram should be servants in a foreign land, namely 400 years. But the Israelites were so far from being in a state of servitude all the time of their sojourn in Egypt, that their bondage formed the exception instead of the rule -and served to mark the contrast between the immediately preceding the Exodus and the previous centuries. Neither can the epithet of strangers be justly interpreted with any exclusive reference either to their residence or to their bondage in Egypt; for Abram, Isaac, and Jacob are called strangers in the land of Canaan, just as much as were their descendants in Egypt. There is consequently no historical precision in this statement. When it is further stated that their posterity should come out with great substance and take possession of Canaan, so that the fourth or fifth

generation-for either may be understood-should again possess the promised land, four generations are clearly made equal to these 400 years, and indeed in such manner that the fourth and last is the one

which actually does come out. Can we require any further proof that no accurate specification of time is here throughout to be expected, but that the whole is to be viewed as a prophetic mode of expressing a long period, and that the determinate number four is but a conventional form, borrowed from the genealogical registers? For we shall clearly prove, hereafter, that the genealogies, prevalent at that time, had four branches.

2. The second datum occurs-with reference to the Exodus (Ex. xii. 40.) in the following parenthetical remark: "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years."

This statement may seem to originate in the same theory which forms the foundation of the previous passage, so that the thirty years may be reckoned as the age of the migrating host, they being at the same time called the fifth generation. Or it may be said the latter is the historical, strictly chronological, the former the prophetic form, in which there is no definition of time. Upon either view it is plain that the two data taken literally do not agree, and that they are therefore not strictly chronological. In the first case we could not from the outset expect any strictly chronological date, for none such can be based upon a prophetic announcement. It is certainly very different with the second hypothesis. But in this case the fact of a broad discrepancy in the terms of the tradition as handed down from the remotest period precludes its adoption. as the basis of any chronological system. The common text of the Septuagint inserts after "Egypt" the words" and in Canaan." We shall see in the sequel that, according to the genealogies from Abram to Jacob,

the earlier sojourn in Canaan is fixed at 215 years; this number, therefore, here clearly forms the basis of the computation, the period from the migration of Abram into Canaan to the Exodus having been considered as ranging itself under two equal divisions, one of which belongs to Canaan, the other to Egypt. But then it should have said-the children of Israel "and their fathers," which is in fact the reading, both of the Alexandrian MS. of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan version. But no such regular division can ever be historical. Consequently, both the Alexandrian and Samaritan addition must be considered as a licence of conjectural criticism, and the preference given to the Hebrew Text. But 430 is exactly the double of the time from Abram's entrance into Canaan down to Jacob's journey into Egypt. The number, therefore, is itself conventional and unhistorical. For it were in our opinion as repugnant to any sound critical view of the passages to suppose that in early times such genealogical lists could have been so parcelled out, that the sum resulting from them should form precisely one half of the 430 historically transmitted years, as to assume the one period to have really been exactly the double of the other. There is no reason why any registers should have been so artificially adjusted, as that the series of years obtained should form precisely one half of the number historically established for the next period. On the contrary, we must consider it the more natural explanation of the passage, to adopt the number 215 as the more ancient. It represents the traditionary accounts of the primitive times of Canaan as embodied. in a genealogy of the three patriarchs, which commenced with Abram's migration out of Mesopotamia, and ended with the settlement of Jacob in Egypt. For the period of the sojourn in Egypt there existed neither historical chronology nor even history. There appeared indeed, during the period between Joseph and

Moses, no personages of sufficient prominence to furnish materials for genealogical registers. They doubled therefore the previous patriarchal number for the time of the sojourn in Egypt, as a means of indicating its far longer duration, and gave the latter number the form of an historical sum total without the basis of genealogical registers. Parallel with this sum runs-whether of earlier or later origin may be a question-the prophetic announcement of 400 years and four generations.

This latter form of the tradition is probably connected with the legendary genealogies of particular families, those of the Levites especially. For almost all of them have three or four branches. But whether these were constructed on the basis of that passage, or whether the chronology of the passage were borrowed from them, in neither case can sound criticism here admit the existence of any element of genuine historical chronology.

The following genealogical tables may serve to elucidate the foregoing details. We begin with those of the Levites, for here, if anywhere, the genealogical succession must have been preserved through that of the High Priests.

I. Levi to Aaron: Exodus vi. 16. seqq.

Levi † 137 years old.

Phinehas (fights in the battle against Midian, in which Balaam fell (Num. xxxi. 6.).