$188. As the 6th, 7th, 9th and 11th months of the Jewish year lie in the second year of Darius, it follows that the month-epoch of Darius lies between the 11th and 6th months; doubtless therefore it is 1 Nisan, viz. of the year 519 Hence B. C. HAGGAI i. 1. 2 Darius, 6th month, 1st day = 4 August: on this day Haggai began to prophesy. On the 24th of the month = 27 Aug. Joshua and Zerubbabel began to take measures for the carrying on of the work. On the 21st of the 7th month = 23 Sept., Haggai prophesied a second time, ii. 1. On the 24th of the 9th month, ii. 10, i. e. 24 November, the foundations of the Temple were laid. ZECHARIAH began to prophesy in the 8th month, which began 30 September. Chap. i. 7. 11th month, 24th day = 22 Jan. 517.-Chap. vii. 1. 4th year, 9th month, 4th day = 12 Nov. 516. On the 3rd Adar in the 6th year of Darius 16 February 513, the building of the second Temple was complete. = CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF ESTHER: $ 189. It is almost universally admitted that the Ahasuerus (Hhashwerosh = Khshershe of the cuneiform inscriptions) is the Xerxes of Grecian history. Of this prince, the book of Esther mentions the 3rd, 7th and 12th years. His years bear date from the month Nisan, iii, 7. ff. By the Canon, 1 Xerxes began Dec. 486 B.c. i. e. in the course of 485, which is also the year deduced from Grecian history. If then the years of Xerxes are reckoned from 1 Nisan preceding the death of Darius, i. e. 485 B.C., the 3rd year begins 1 Nisan 483, and the 7th, 1 Nisan 479 B.C., therefore the month Tebeth ii. 16. (Dec. 479-Jan. 478) which is the year after the battle of Salamis (480 Autumn) and retreat of Xerxes from Greece. All this is perfectly consistent with the history. In this view of the case, the great feast in chap. i. may have been connected with the preparations for the invasion of Greece. Perhaps, however, the reign of Xerxes may be dated from an earlier epoch. Xerxes was certainly raised to the throne before the death of Darius: for so Herodotus relates, vii. 2-4. that Darius, two years before his death απέδεξε βασιλήα Πέρono Zéptea. In this view, the reign began Nisan 487 B.C., and the great feast (Esther i. 1) in the 3rd year = 485 B C., will be connected with the commencement of Xerxes's undivided sovereignty, and all the events down to the elevation of Esther in the 7th year (Dec. 481 or Jan. 480), will lie before the commencement of the invasion of Greece: which is, unquestionably, the most probable view of the facts. $ 190. AN exact determination of the Jewish epoch of this reign, is of great importance to the interpretation of Daniel's Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks. By the Canon, the nominal epoch is December 465. Yet it is certain that this is too late. For Ctesias, who collected the materials of his Persian history during a residence of several years at the Persian court, within 20 years of the death of that monarch, gives him a reign of 42 years. Now Artaxerxes died (this is certain from history, Thucyd. iv. 50,) in в.c. 424: his reign therefore must have begun in 466 B. C. The Canon dates the reign of Darius II. from November 424, but this estimate includes the two short reigns of Xerxes II. and Sogdianus which amounted according to Ctesias to 8 or 9 months. (Manetho says 9, and so Diodorus's authorities.) In like manner the Canon takes no notice of the short reign of the usurper Artabanus (which Manetho gives as 7 months), but throws it into the reign of Xerxes I. And hence perhaps it is that the Canon places the 1st of Artaxerxes so late as Nov. 465. It was not easy, perhaps for its framers, to determine the exact historical truths amid the confusion occasioned by the usurpation, nor was it their object to determine their dates with critical accuracy where their historical documents were confused: their purpose was gained if they could obtain an uninterrupted continuity of years reckoned from a given epoch, but they were not solicitous to determine whether the united reigns of Xerxes and Artabanus amounted more nearly to 21 or to 20 years. Between the 1 Thoth of Xerxes and 1 Thoth of Darius II., their historical documents gave a clear interval of 62 years, and it mattered little to them whether the point of division were placed at 467 or 466, or at 465. 191. But it is not only from the testimony of Ctesias, combined with the known year-date of the death of Artaxerxes, that we obtain the year 466 B.c. as the first of his reign. We learn from Thucydides, i. 137, that Themistocles on his arrival in Asia found Artaxerxes newly seated on the throne, verti Baoiλévovτa: and in the history of his flight we find him passing by Naxos at the time when the fleet of Athens was yet blockading that island. The year of the conquest of Naxos, according to Mr. Clinton, was B.C. 466, which statement is adopted by Bishop Thirlwall, who says, "in the year of the conquest of Naxos B. C. 466, the same in which Themistocles took refuge in Asia," Hist. of Greece, Vol. iii. p. 5. It is true, other accounts make Themistocles the suppliant of Xerxes (Ephorus, Dinon, Clitarchus, Heraclides, see Plut. Themist. c. 27). Charon of Lampsacus agrees with Thucydides, and this is the account which all the best historians prefer. § 192. The years of Artaxerxes with which we are most concerned are, the 7th, in which Ezra came to Jerusalem, and the 20th in which Nehemiah obtained permission to rebuild the city. Ezra left Babylon on the 1st Nisan, in the 7th year of Artaxerxes, and arrived at Jerusalem on the 5th day of the 5th month. As there are no other dates in Ezra, it does not appear from what month the years of this king bear date. But from Nehemiah i. 1, compared with ii. 1, it appears that Chisleu in the 20th year lies before Nisan of the same year. In Nehemiah's enumeration therefore, the years bear date from some epoch between Nisan and Chisleu, of course then, from 1 Tisri. Hence, the year of accession being B. C. .466 ...466 .460 and Nisan and Ab of the 7th year lie in. .459 Again, 20th of Artaxerxes begins (Tisri).... .447 and Chisleu and Nisan of the 20th year lie in 447 and 446 B.C. respectively. The last date in Nehemiah is the 32nd of Artaxerxes, which began 435 B.c. Nehemiah xiii. 6. SECTION II. TIMES OF THE SYRO-GRECIAN KINGS, ESPECIALLY OF ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES, AND OF THE MACCABEES. § 193. THE interval between the close of the Canonical Scrip tures and the times described in the books of Maccabees is not of sufficient interest to be here examined in detail. But when we arrive at the times of the Maccabees, or more properly of the Second Empire, we are once more upon sacred ground, seeing that we possess an inspired outline of this period of the history, in that wonderful prophecy of Daniel which is called "the Scripture of Truth," chap. xi. xii. The historical accuracy of that outline was acknowledged of old by Porphyry, who commented upon it, and urged that its very exactness proved it to have been written after the event. But the proof of the sceptical hypothesis is impracticable, for this, if for no other reason, viz. that there are circumstances of the prophetical description to which there is nothing correspondent in the facts of Syrian history, and which no forger of a pretended prediction would have admitted into his description. That such is the case does not surprise us who are aware that the seeming excess of the terms of such predictions above their fulfilment, results from the complex aim and structure of prophecy: but on the sceptical hypothesis it constitutes an inexplicable difficulty. For what Jewish forger of a prophecy would have vitiated the credibility of his imposture by inserting such particulars in a history, the facts of which were notorious to those for whom he wrote? The authenticity of Daniel's prophecy has been learnedly vindicated from all the modern objections, by the pious and learned Hengstenberg, (Die Authentie des Daniel, 1831), and Hävernick (Commentar über das B. Daniel). And I hope the present Work will furnish manifold evidence of a different kind, to the Divine original of this wonderful portion of Holy Writ. present, however, it concerns me only to remark that the Inspired Narrative of Old Testament times does not terminate with Nehemiah. The next and most momentous crisis which was to befal the chosen people after the close of the Canon, was, by God's merciful providence, not only foretold in general terms, At but pourtrayed in the form of history, in every respect save those of tense, and names, and historical dates. "The Scripture of Truth" recited by the tongue of an Angel to the "man greatly beloved," has this peculiar distinction above all other prophecies: it is the only instance of a prediction cast into the genuine mould of historical narration. And the explanation of the phenomenon may easily be conjectured. With Malachi, direct inspiration was to cease for many ages: therefore it pleased God to leave with the Church a history, beforehand, of that great crisis, which, above all others, foreshadows a time with which "the world that now is" will, we are assured, come to a close. My immediate concern, in this place, is to define the historical chronology1 of the times of which we have the anticipated history in the two last chapters of Daniel. I shall confine my remarks to such events as are noted in, or have a direct bearing upon, that prophecy. THE SECOND EMPIRE took its rise from Alexander's $194. conquest of Asia. Dan. viii. 21; xi. 3. Alexander ascended the throne of Macedon, Hecatombæon, B.C. 336 crossed the Hellespont early in the spring of 334: conquered at the Granicus in Thargelion of the same year: fought at Issus, Nov. 333: took Tyre after a seven months' siege, July 332: in the same year, took Gaza, and founded Alexandria in Egypt. In 331 he passed through Phoenicia to Thapsacus (July), and fought at Arbela, 1 Oct. In 330, July, Darius was slain. Here the direct connexion with Scripture prophecy may be supposed to cease. Alexander died in the year B.C. 323: the day is known from the Journals (Enuepides) of Diodotus and Eumenes, (ap. Plutarch. Vit. 76) it was the 28 Dæsius, which Ideler (i. 407) identifies with the 11th June. 195. We pass on to the time noted in Dan. xi. 6. "The king of the south" is Ptolemy Lagi, (323-285): this king at first handled the Jews severely, he took Jerusalem by stratagem on a sabbath-day (Agatharchid. ap. Joseph. Ant. xii. 1); Appian says he destroyed the walls, Syr. c. 50. Afterwards, however, he became satisfied of the Jewish loyalty. The person who is said to be "one of his princes, and to be strong above : Syrian and Egyptian |