the chronology of the Kings rests, and we cannot do better than to allow him

to introduce the subject to us in his own quaint style.

Some of the perplexities of this subject reside in the two methods

adopted by the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and others by reasons that

do not appear upon the surface.  Dr. Lightfoot says:

'In casting up the time of the collateral Kingdoms, your only way is to

lay them in two columns, one justly paralleling the other, and run them

both by years, as the Text directs you.  But here is nicety indeed, not

to see how strangely they are reckoned, sometimes inclusive, sometimes

otherwise -- for this you will easily find; but to find a reason why

they be so reckoned ... Ahaziah 2 years older than his father (2 Chron.

22:1,2); Jotham reigning 4 years after he is buried (2 Kings 15:30);

Joram crowned king in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings 1:17 with 1

Kings 22:51), and in the 22nd year of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings 8:16), and

after Jehoshaphat's death (2 Chron. 21:1)'.

To the superficial reader, such statements seem irreconcilable with

sober fact, yet there is not one but yields to a reasonable explanation, when

all material evidence is sifted.

We are indebted to Willis J. Beecher for providing a key to some of

these chronological problems.  Among other things he has shown that the Bible

does not reckon the first year of a king from the date of his accession to

the throne, the year begins either with the preceding, or following New

Year's Day, i.e. the new moon before Passover.  To make this essential rule

quite clear let us take an imaginary example.  A king ascends the throne on

June 21st, 1950.  The day and the month are ignored, and according to whether

it be Israel or Judah that is doing the reckoning, the year will be put down

either as 1950 dating back to the preceding April or Passover, or it will be

dated as 1951, commencing with the following April or Passover, and the whole

of the year 1950 will be credited to the king that had died.  The

chronological system was not written for the kings, the kings had to conform

to the chronology, and only completed years count.

Judah's method would reckon the whole of 1950 to the reign that had

ended.  Israel's method was to reckon 1950 to the king who had died, and to

count the broken years also as one to the king that succeeded.  Consequently

there is considerable difference in the total length of the reigns if the

numbers are mechanically added without the recognition of certain principles.

Upon investigation we discover that the period of the Kings falls into

three great groups of parallel datings which have the advantage of commencing

together at the commencement of each group.

The accompanying chart (page 104) will show these groups, and the way

in which they interlock.  We start with Rehoboam for here the two kingdoms

run together.  The proof of the dates given in this chart is yet to be given;

for the moment they can be ignored.

The accession of Jehu is a convenient break.  We read in 2 Kings 9 that

immediately after his anointing, Jehu drove out to Jezreel and being met by

Joram and his question 'Is it peace, Jehu?' and he answered:

'What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her

witchcrafts are so many ... and Jehu drew a bow with his full strength,