254 r. GARD FLEAY, ESQ._, M.k., ON THE SYNCHRONOUS 



Joram, 8 for 12 ; Menahem, 4 for 10 ; Pekah, 3 for 20 ; Hoshea, 

 7 or 11 for 9 ; beside various other minute alterations. If such 

 arbitrary changes be really required, the author of the book of 

 Kings and the authors of the books of the Chronicles of the 

 Kings of Judah and Israel, to which he refers as his principal 

 authorities, must have been utterly untrustworthy in all matters 

 of chronology ; and, if that be the case, there is no trustworthy 

 chronology in the whole of the Old Testament. Before assenting 

 to this startling proposition, it may be well to examine the 

 details of years mentioned in the Book of Kings. Possibly 

 Arithmetic, Logic and Common Sense may help us as well as 

 Assyriology and Philology. 



The only attempt in the conservative direction at all note- 

 worthy which I have met with is that of Oppert. He assumes 

 too large a hiatus in the list of Assyrian eponyms, invents a 

 second Menahem, separates Pul from Tiglath Pileser, and is on 

 the whole rather more wild and extravagant than his opponents. 

 Nevertheless I feel that the hypotheses of the Assyriologists are 

 prima facie so improbable that it is quite worth while to reopen 

 the question, which I now proceed to do. 



I take as starting point for my reckoning the taking of 

 Samaria by Shalmaneser, or rather by Sargon, in 722 B.C., a date 

 which is fixed within a month or two by universal acceptance 

 of all authorities ; and from this, by the calculations to be given 

 hereunder, I arrive at 962 B.C. for the accession of Eehoboam 

 and the separation of Judah and Israel. The first problem 

 before us is to account for the difference between 240 years 

 thus assigned to the existence of the divided monarchies and 

 260 years or 241 years, which are the numbers arising from the 

 addition of the items in the text for Judah and Israel 

 respectively, without contradicting the dates required by the 

 Assyrian monuments. 



There are many apparent discrepancies of one or two years 

 between the lists of the Kings of Judah and Israel on which I 

 shall say a word further on. At present I confine myself to 

 the larger and more important differences. 



The first of these is the statement 2 Kings xv, 1, that 

 Azariah's accession took place in the 27th year of Jeroboam II. 

 This is impossible ; but the impossibility has always been 

 recognised, and the new Assyriological scheme has nothing to 

 add to the old orthodox solution, viz., for 27 read 14 (the 27th 

 year from the end of Jeroboam's reign). 



The second difficulty is the difference in the total reckonings 

 of Judah and Israel. This amounts to 19 years, and used to be 



