Jump to content

Ussher chronology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 75.86.172.174 (talk) at 16:34, 30 November 2017. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Annales Veteris Testamenti page 1 (Latin)
Annals of the World page 1 (English)

The Ussher chronology is a 17th-century chronology of the history of the world formulated from a literal reading of the Old Testament by James Ussher, the Archbishop of Armagh (Church of Ireland). The chronology is sometimes associated with young Earth creationism, which holds that the universe was created only a few millennia ago by God as they believe is described in the first two chapters of the biblical book of Genesis.

The full title of Ussher's work is Annales Veteris Testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti, una cum rerum Asiaticarum et Aegyptiacarum chronico, a temporis historici principio usque ad Maccabaicorum initia producto. ("Annals of the Old Testament, deduced from the first origins of the world, the chronicle of Asiatic and Egyptian matters together produced from the beginning of historical time up to the beginnings of Maccabees")

Ussher's work was his contribution to the long-running theological debate on the age of the Earth. This was a major concern of many Christian scholars over the centuries.

The chronology is sometimes called the Ussher-Lightfoot chronology because John Lightfoot published a similar chronology in 1642–1644. This, however, is a misnomer, as the chronology is based on Ussher's work alone and not that of Lightfoot. Ussher deduced that the first day of creation fell upon, October 23, 4004 BC, in the proleptic Julian calendar, near the autumnal equinox. Lightfoot similarly deduced that Creation began at nightfall near the autumnal equinox, but in the year 3929 BC. Lightfoot's use of Adam 3929BC probably is Samaritan Genesis 1556-year preFlood as 3929-2373bc by rejecting Masoretic 1656-year as 4029-2373bc which inspired Adventists reading KJV Acts 13:20 as 450-year judges (instead of Isaac being 450 until judges) to claim this 1656-year is 4129-2473bc leading to their 4128-2472bc used by WatchTower Russell (changed to 4028-2372bc, then 4026-2370bc).

Ussher's proposed date of 4004 BC differed little from other Biblically-based estimates, such as those of Jose ben Halafta (3761 BC), Bede (3952 BC), Ussher's near-contemporary Scaliger (3949 BC), Johannes Kepler (3992 BC) or Sir Isaac Newton (c. 4000 BC).[1] [dubious – discuss] Ussher was influenced by the same data as Jasher locking in 2349 BC Flood to 2127BC birth of Terah. (Ussher's 2349BC is year 1656AM from 4004bc as 1AM, but Jasher uses Jare's 62 years not 162 and so his same 2349BC Flood is 1556AM. Likewise Jasher and Ussher diverts beyond 2127BC Terah which means writings existed advocating 2127BC for some event.- see Talk discussion) The 4000BC Adam was influenced by the belief (then widely held) that the Earth's potential duration was 6000 years (2000 to Abram, 2000 before the birth of Christ and 2000 after), corresponding to the six days of Creation, on the grounds that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Peter 3:8). This tradition was held untill failure in AD 2000,[2][3] more than six thousand years after 4004 BC.

Ussher's methods

The chronologies of Ussher and other biblical scholars corresponded so closely because they used much the same methodology to calculate key events recorded in the Bible. Their task was complicated by the fact that the Bible was compiled from different sources over several centuries with differing versions and lengthy chronological gaps, making it impossible to do a simple totaling of Biblical ages and dates. In his article on Ussher's calendar, James Barr has identified three distinct periods that Ussher and others had to tackle:[4]

  1. "Creation to Abram's migration." This section is fairly easy to calculate, using the chronological data in Genesis 5 and 11, which gives an unbroken male lineage, with dates, from the creation to Abraham. Ussher uses the chronology found in the Masoretic text, instead of the alternate chronologies found in the Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch. Ussher fixed this period at 2083 years, from the 4004 to 1922 BC.
  2. "Abram's migration to Solomon's temple." For this period, Ussher followed Paul, who reckoned 430 years from Abram's migration to the Exodus. 1 Kings 6 gives 480 years from the Exodus to the beginning of Solomon's temple in Solomon's fourth year of reign. These 910 years span from 1992 to 1012 BC.
  3. "Period of the Judaean kingdom from the fourth year of Solomon to the end." This period is the most difficult to calculate, due to repeated difficulties in correlating the regnal years of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel. The simple addition of the reigns of Judah's kings gives 430 years, but by positing a few overlapping reigns Ussher shortens this to 423 years: 1012 to 589 BC.

After reckoning the years from creation to the last kings of Judah, Ussher used 2 Kings 25:17 to establish the length of time from the creation to the accession of Babylonian king Amel-Marduk (also known as Evil-Merodach).[5] He then used information from Babylonian, Greek, and Roman sources to fix the date of Amel-Marduk's enthronment at 563 BC, from which he was able to deduce a creation in 4004 BC.[5]

In fixing the date of Jesus' birth, Ussher took account of an error perpetrated by Dionysius Exiguus, the founder of the Anno Domini numbering system. Ussher chose 5 BC as Christ's birth year[6] because Josephus indicated that the death of Herod the Great occurred in 4 BC.[7] Thus, for the gospel of Matthew to be correct, Jesus could not have been born after that date. However, according to the gospel of Luke, Jesus was born during the period that Quirinius was governor of Syria which was roughly 10 years after Herod's death.

The season in which Creation occurred was the subject of considerable theological debate in Ussher's time. Many scholars proposed it had taken place in the spring, the start of the Babylonian, Chaldean and other cultures' chronologies. Others, including Ussher, thought it more likely that it had occurred in the autumn, largely because that season marked the beginning of the Jewish year.

Ussher further narrowed down the date by using the Jewish calendar to establish the "first day" of creation as falling on a Sunday near the autumnal equinox.[8] The day of the week was a backward calculation from the six days of creation with God resting on the seventh, which in the Jewish tradition is Saturday—hence Creation began on a Sunday. The astronomical tables that Ussher probably used were Kepler's Tabulae Rudolphinae (Rudolphine Tables, 1627). Using them, he would have concluded that the equinox occurred on Tuesday October 25, only one day earlier than the traditional day of its creation, on the fourth day of Creation week, Wednesday, along with the Sun, Moon, and stars (Genesis 1:16). Modern equations place the autumnal equinox of 4004 BC on Sunday October 23 Julian.[9]

Ussher's understanding of creation placed the "first day" referred to in Genesis 1:5 on October 23, but with a "pre-creation" event, which he identified as the "beginning of time" occurring the previous night.[10] Ussher referred to his dating of creation on the first page of Annales in Latin and on the first page of its English translation Annals of the World (1658). In the following extract from the English translation, the phrase "in the year of the Julian Calendar" refers to the Julian Period, of which year 1 is 4713 BC, and therefore year 710 is 4004 BC.

In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth, Gen. 1, v. 1. Which beginning of time, according to our Chronologie, fell upon the entrance of the night preceding the twenty third day of Octob[er] in the year of the Julian Calendar, 710.

Ussher provides a slightly different time in his "Epistle to the Reader" in his Latin and English works:[6] "I deduce that the time from the creation until midnight, January 1, 1 AD was 4003 years, seventy days and six hours." Six hours before midnight would be 6 pm.

Ussher's chronology today

It may be an accident of history that Ussher's chronology remains so well known while those of Scaliger and Bede, amongst others, have slipped into obscurity. From William Lloyd's 1701 edition onwards, annotated editions of the immensely influential King James translation of the Bible began to include his revised chronology with their marginal annotations and cross-references. The first page of Genesis was annotated with Ussher's date of Creation, 4004 BC. It was included in the widely distributed Scofield Reference Bible. More modern translations of the Bible usually omit the chronology, but there are still many copies of the annotated King James in circulation.

By the middle of the 19th century, Ussher's chronology came under increasing attack from supporters of uniformitarianism, who argued that Ussher's "young Earth" was incompatible with the increasingly accepted view of an Earth much more ancient than Ussher's. It became generally accepted that the Earth was tens, perhaps even hundreds of millions of years old. Ussher fell into disrepute among theologians as well; in 1890, Princeton professor William Henry Green wrote a highly influential article in Bibliotheca Sacra entitled "Primeval Chronology" in which he strongly criticised Ussher. He concluded:

We conclude that the Scriptures furnish no data for a chronological computation prior to the life of Abraham; and that the Mosaic records do not fix and were not intended to fix the precise date either of the Flood or of the creation of the world.[11]

The similarly conservative theologian B. B. Warfield reached the same conclusion in "On The Antiquity and Unity of the Human Race",[12] commenting that "it is precarious in the highest degree to draw chronological inferences from genealogical tables".

Nevertheless, Professor James Barr (then Oriel Professor of the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, Oxford University) wrote in 1984:

…probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that… the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story…[citation needed]

Archbishop Ussher's chronology has in recent years been subject to artistic criticism, including in the play Inherit the Wind (based on the Scopes Monkey Trial) and the fantasy novel Good Omens which ironically alleges that "he is off by a quarter of an hour". A different viewpoint comes from Stephen Jay Gould, who, while totally disagreeing with Ussher's chronology, nevertheless wrote:[13]

I shall be defending Ussher's chronology as an honorable effort for its time and arguing that our usual ridicule only records a lamentable small-mindedness based on mistaken use of present criteria to judge a distant and different past

Ussher represented the best of scholarship in his time. He was part of a substantial research tradition, a large community of intellectuals working toward a common goal under an accepted methodology…

See also

Notes

  1. ^ William W. Hay (2012). Experimenting on a Small Planet: A Scholarly Entertainment. Springer. p. 63. ISBN 9783642285608. Retrieved November 17, 2013.
  2. ^ Kenneth G. C. Newport (28 August 2000). Apocalypse and millennium: studies in biblical eisegesis. Cambridge University Press. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-521-77334-8. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
  3. ^ Christopher Rowland; John Barton (2002). Apocalyptic in history and tradition. Sheffield Academic Press. pp. 233–252. ISBN 978-0-8264-6208-4. Retrieved 23 March 2011.
  4. ^ James Barr, 1984-85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:603–607.
  5. ^ a b James Barr, 1984-85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67: 579-580.
  6. ^ a b James Ussher, "Epistle to the Reader", Annals of the World (2003) page 9.
  7. ^ John P. Pratt, "Yet another eclipse for Herod", The Planetarian, vol. 19, no. 4, Dec. 1990, pp. 8–14.
  8. ^ James Barr, 1984-85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67: 591.
  9. ^ Calendrica The position of the Sun at the autumnal equinox is 180°, where 0° is its position at the vernal equinox.
  10. ^ James Barr, 1984-85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67: 592.
  11. ^ Primeval Chronology
  12. ^ Princeton Theological Review, 1911
  13. ^ Stephen Jay Gould (November 1991). "Fall in the House of Ussher". Natural History. 100: 12–21. Archived from the original on March 3, 2012.

References

  • Ussher, J, 1650. Annals of the World: James Ussher's Classic Survey of World History ISBN 0-89051-360-0 (Modern English republication, ed. Larry and Marion Pierce, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2003)
  • Ussher, J, 1650. "The Annals of the World". Retrieved 12 October 2014.
  • James Barr, 1984–85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:575–608.
  • William R. Brice, 1982. "Bishop Ussher, John Lightfoot and the Age of Creation", Journal of Geological Education 30:18–24.
  • Stephen Jay Gould, 1993. Fall in the House of Ussher in Eight Little Piggies (Penguin Books)
  • Bishop Ussher Dates the World: 4004 BC
  • John Lightfoot, The Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot, D. D., 13 vols., 1822–25.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ussher_chronology&oldid=812909894"