197 



David to the second of Vespasian 1179 years." (p. 341.) 

 it is true, indeed, that the first of those numbers is not at 

 present to be found in Josephus, but the second is still read. 

 (Bellum. Jud. VI. 4. secundum Ruffini distinctionem vero, 

 18.) It appears to be reckoned from the taking of Jerusalem 

 and the removal of the seat of government there in the 

 seventh 3'ear of his reign ; and simdarljf, it should seem, 

 that the first interval is probably reckoned from the exod to 

 the end of David, or rather to the association of Solomon in 

 the government, about two years before the death of his 

 father,* so that the fourth year of his separate reign might be 

 as Josephus assigns it,) coincident with the o92nd year of the 

 exod. In this view, the remark of Clemens in regard to the first 

 epoch, whether he derived it from the expression of Josephus, 

 (as is most probable, since the second period is simpli) as- 

 signed) or whether he deduced it from the separate intervals 

 of the historian, is particularly important ; as it affords a new 

 authority and argument, that the numbers at present read, 



respecting 



• In another part of the hislorj', Josephus reckons from the " first buikling (urio-ea,-) 

 of the temple by Solomon, till the second year of Vespasian, 1 130 years and 7 months," 

 (Chap. X. Lib. 7. Bell. Jud.) which is above 4S years less than the former account, 

 1179. Perhaps Josephus meant to reckon from the dedication in the 8lh year of 

 Solomon, and the 40 of David would make up the deficiency; but this would be inac- 

 curate, as David reigned 7 years in Hebron, before the conquest of Jerusalem ; but at 

 all events, his remaining 33, and the 8 first of Solomon aflbrd an aggregate which diflcrs 

 little from the defect of 4-8 years — the items of ihi; historian, experience has taught us 

 should not be too closely pressed. 



