94 



torian, agreeably to the uniform tenor and spirit of the 

 biblical records, intends to present us with a chronological 

 order and scries in his narration. The author of the Book of 

 Kings undoubtedly, in marking the interval that had elapsed 

 between the exod and the foundation of the temple, had a 

 view to prevent any difficulty or hesitation that might arise 

 from the dnbious calculus pursued in the history of the 

 Judges; and the precautionary wisdom and foresight which 

 directed him, is clearly manifested in the event. It is, in- 

 deed, almost impossible to derive any unobjectionable and 

 consistent system from the numbers nakedly assigned in the 

 narrative, unassisted by the grand epoch afibrded by the 

 text, (1 Kings, 6-1.) and the various circumstances casu- 

 ally disclosed in the history, which tend to elucidate and 

 confirm it. The numberless variety of opinions Avhich have 

 been delivered upon this subject, and which all pretend to 

 stand on the same ground of adherence to the assigned pe- 

 riods of jurisdiction and servitude, are abundant proofs of 

 this. Among the ancient chronologists, the periods and in- 

 tervals oscillated between the 480 or 600 of Eusebius, and 

 the 757 of Nicephorus ; Apud Vignoles, but Nicephorus ad 

 calcem Syncelli in Goar's edition, Paris, 1652, reckons from 

 exod to David 630, which would give only 674 to the foun- 

 dation of the temple; while, among the Christian writers, 

 the younger Vossius and Pezron, as we have seen, have dis- 

 covered authority and evidence to enlarge it beyond even 



the 



