precisely 477 solar years*. But no calculation by lunar years of any description will reduce 490 years to the exact sum of 477 solar years. If we consider them as true lunar years of 354 days each, 490 such years will be equal to 474 solar years and about 231 days, which falls more than two years short of 477 solar years: and, if we consider them as lunar years of 360 days each, we shall be yet more in fault the other way; for 490 such years will be equal to 482 solar years and about 349 days, which carries us almost six years beyond 477 solar years. So that, according to either mode of abbreviated computation, the 490 years cannot be made to quadrate with the 477 solar years which elapsed between the twentieth year of Artaxerxes Longimanus and the year in which our Lord was crucified.

2. Petavius and Abp. Usher compute, like Africanus, the seventy weeks from the grant of Nehemiah's commission in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, though they differ materially from him in other particulars. They rightly judge, that, however the Jews might reckon single insulated years, a period of 490 of their years is virtually the same

Christ was crucified in the month Nisan A. Æ. C. 33 and A. P. J. 4746, and Nehemiah received his commission from Artaxerxes in the month Nisan A. A. C. 445 and A. P. J. 4269.

as a period of 490 solar years. But this opinion, as Africanus was well aware, will not allow them to reckon 490 solar years from the Nisan in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes as that year is arranged in the canon of Ptolemy. Hence they place it from nine to ten years further back; the former making the Nisan in it to be the Nisan of the year 4259 of the Julian period and of the year A. C. 455, the latter making the Nisan in it to be the Nisan of the Julian year 4260 and of the year A. C. 454. From the Nisan then in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, in which month Nehemiah received his commission*, Petavius, according to his arrangement of it, first computes sixty-nine weeks or 483 years; the period, which (we are taught by the prophecy) reaches from the going forth of the edict to rebuild Jerusalem unto Messiah the prince. This brings him down to the Julian year 4742, in which he places the baptism of Christ. He then reckons three years more for the half week, which brings him to the Julian year 4745. Here he places the crucifixion, by which the Levitical sacrifice and oblation was spiritually abolished †. In a similar

*Nehem. ii. 1.

As Petavius is very brief, I shall give his system in his own words, more especially since I have intimated, that Prideaux appears to me to be mistaken in representing both him and Usher as alike computing the seventy weeks from the Nisan

similar manner, from the Nisan in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, according to his arrangement of it, Abp. Usher first computes the sixty nine weeks or 483 years. This brings him to the Nisan of the Julian year 4743 and of the year 30 of the Christian era, in which month was celebrated the first passover of our Lord's public ministry. From his first passover he next reckons three years for the half week. This brings him to the fourth passover of Christ, which fell out in the Julian year

of the Julian year 4260. Usher undoubtedly does, but Petavius reckons them from the preceding year; though they both make the first year of Artaxerxes to commence in the Julian year 4240. "Sed nec illud præterire volumus; quod de du"plici Artaxerxis exordio superius attigimus, utile imprimis "esse ad 70 Danielis hebdomadas explicandas. Quarum ini"tium ab anno Artaxerxis 20 ducimus; eo nimirum, quo "edictum de instaurandis Hierosolymis exitum habere cœpit “(Dan. ix. 25.): quem calumniis ac ludificationibus æmuli "hactenus impedierant. Sed vicesimus iste Artaxerxis, non a morte Xerxis, sed a primo ejus initio, repetitur. Itaque primus annorum 490, quæ sunt hebdomadæ annales 70, "convenit in A. A. C. 455, A. P. J. 4259, A. M. 3529. Septuagesima hebdomas iniit anno ipso, quo Christus a Johanne baptismo tingitur, A. P. J. 4742. Quare anno 3 hebdoma"dis Christus interfectus est: In dimidio (inquit Daniel ix. 27.) hebdomadis deficiet hostia et sacrificium, hoc est, in ejus

66

66

parte dimidia, μεσαζεσης της εβδομαδος, labente hebdomade "postrema, legalibus sacrificiis modus adhibebitur, quod ea "morientis Christi vox indicat, Consummatum est." Rationar. Temp. par. ii. 1. iii. c. 10.

1

4746 and in the year 33 of the Christian era. But at this fourth passover our Lord suffered upon the cross, and thus spiritually abolished the Levitical sacrifices by his one great oblation of himself once offered *.

The schemes of Petavius and Usher, which are fundamentally at least the same, seem to me to be as inadmissible as that of Africanus, though not altogether for the same reasons-1. The chronological arrangement, which with some variation they adopt, has been shewn to be erroneous, as contradicting the universal testimony of historians respecting the lengths of the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes, and particularly as running counter to

* The plan of Abp. Usher is introduced into the chronolo gical tables at the end of the common 4to. bible: but, because the twentieth year of Artaxerxes according to his arrangement of it commenced in the year A. C. 455, they erroneously represent the seventy weeks as also commencing from that year. Whereas, in his grace's plan, they commence, as Dr. Prideaux rightly states, from the Nisan of the following year 454, which corresponds with the Julian year 4260. For he supposes the twentieth year of Artaxerxes to commence after the Nisan in the year A. C. 455, and therefore to include the Nisan in the year A. C. 454. Consequently, the Nisan of the twentieth year of that prince, is, according to the Archbishop's arrangement, the Nisan of the latter of those years, not of the former of them. And this, as it appears to me, is the precise point wherein he and Petavius differ. But see Usser. Annal. in A. P. J. 4259, 4260.

the canon of Ptolemy. At any rate, though Peta vius might elude the force of this objection by contending that he does not alter the real lengths of their reigns, it fully applies to the scheme of Abp. Usher-2. And, even if their chronological arrangement had been unexceptionable, the interpretation built upon it would nevertheless be liable to various objections. By placing the death of Christ in the middle of the last week, and not attempting to account for the latter half of it, they in effect throw half of the seventieth week out of the grand prophetic period, and thus render it altogether useless and insignificant. The prophecy speaks expressly of seventy weeks: in these interpretations it is expounded as if it spoke of no more than sixty nine weeks and a half. That the whole seventieth week however is significant, no less than the former part of it, is manifest from this circumstance: the same person, who causes the sacrifice and oblation to cease in the midst of the week, confirms the covenant with many for one week. But the person, who abolishes the sacrifice in the midst of the week, is supposed by Petavius and Usher to be Christ: therefore Christ must confirm the covenant with many for one week, which is plainly the whole last week of the seventy. According to the present interpretation however, Christ is put to death in the middle of the last week, during the whole of which,

not