Traditional Jewish chronology

Traditional Jewish chronology (aka Jewish timekeeping). Jewish tradition has long preserved a record of dates and time sequences of important historical events related to the Jewish nation, including but not limited to the dates fixed for the building and destruction of the Second Temple, and which same fixed points in time (henceforth: chronological dates) are well-documented and supported by ancient works, although when compared to the synchronistic chronological tables of modern-day chroniclers, belabored mostly by western scholars of history, they are, notwithstanding, often at variance with their modern ''dating'' system. Discrepancies between the two systems may be as much as 2 years, or well-over 100 years, depending on the event. Prior to the adoption of the BC / AD era of computation and its synchronization with the regnal years of kings and Caesars recorded in historical records, Jews made use of the earlier Seleucid era counting (also known as the ''Year of Alexander''), or, in Hebrew, ''minyan li-šṭarōth'' ("era of contracts"), by which historical dates were marked, from the time of Alexander the Great.

In ordinary time-keeping, often one single, major event was used as a datum point for reckoning time, meaning, given the enormity of a certain event, historians would make note of how long time had passed since that very event in relation to some later event, as is also the case in Jewish chronology.

Brief history of chronology

The Greek historian Timaeus of Tauromenium (c. 365 BCE–260 BCE) introduced the system of reckoning by Olympiads. Nepos is generally acclaimed to have been the first Roman writer of chronography. He marks the birth of Alexander the Great in the 385th year after the foundation of Rome, giving also the names of the consuls for that year. Rome's founding, or what is known as "A.U.C.," ''ab urbe condita'', "from the foundation of the city f Rome" is fixed by Nepos, as also by Polybius, as falling in "the second year of the seventh Olympiad," a year corresponding roughly with 751/0 BCE. Like ancient Hebrew writers of history, their delineations of imperial chronology were centered mostly around provincial, or local, history.

Josephus, when bringing down the regnal years of the Babylonian kings who feature highly in Israel's history, cites the third book of Berossus.

Manetho, who was a high priest and scribe of Egypt, copied down from the ancient Egyptian inscriptions a chronological list of eight early Persian kings for Ptolemy Philadelphus (266 BCE – 228 BCE), beginning with Cambyses, the son of Cyrus the Great, and omitting only the magi's interim rule.

Suetonius' ''De vita Caesarum'' (Lives of the Caesars), Josephus' ''The Jewish War'', and Epiphanius' ''On Weights and Measures'' (Syriac version), all have attempted to accurately portray the regnal years of the Roman emperors, and, despite their good efforts, there are still discrepancies between them. These variants will invariably lead to discrepancies in the accepted chronologies. In Jerome's ''Chronici Canones'' (Chronicle) which he completed in 381 CE, the first regnal year of Julius Caesar, the first Roman emperor: ''Romanorum primus Caius Iulius Caesar'', is marked as 48 BCE, but which Jerome in his original document had written in Roman numerals and given only the number of the Olympiad for events, and no more. Indeed, the corresponding BCE dates which are now present in this work are only the additions of the modern editor, Rudolf Helm.

"For modern scholarship the problem," in E.J. Bickerman's words, "is 'how we know Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BC ' Before 480 BC no date can be precise in terms of the Julian calendar unless confirmed by astronomical phenomena." There is also considerable disagreement among scholarship as to when to reckon the beginning of Augustus Caesar's ''imperium''.

Echoing these great difficulties in chronological notations, D. MacNaughton wrote: "Systems of ancient chronology, propounded even since the days of George Smith, have been many and various, and while in one year one date is assigned with an air of finality to a certain king, a few years later the date is abandoned as erroneous. These changes are natural." In fact, it has taken many hundreds of years for scholars to arrive at the dates that are now assumed to be accurate, as purported by Grafton in his book on "Joseph Scaliger," and where he shows how long it took for Roman consular dates (and archon dates, etc.) to be converted into BC/AD. All the ancient dating systems had to be aligned and converted into the modern system, and cross-referenced, and where others were not easily translatable.

For the chronologies of Babylonian kings till the fall of Babylon, as well as the chronologies of Persian kings, beginning with Cyrus the Great, modern-day historians rely principally upon the work Ptolemy's canon.

Cornerstones in Jewish tradition

Amongst Jews, the era known as the Seleucid era has been used in antiquity to mark chronological events. It was used extensively by Sherira Gaon in the writing of his '' Iggeret''. The practice of reckoning years by this system is mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud (''Avodah Zarah'' 10a): "Said Rav Nahman: In the Diaspora, it is not permissible to count he date in yearsexcept only by the kings of the Grecians." Its usage was common throughout the Jewish world until the sixteenth century, and has been used by Yemenite Diaspora Jews as late as the 1940s, until their immigration to the Land of Israel. By their recollection of the current calendar year, it is shown to have started in the Fall (''Tishri'') of 312 BCE, which agrees with modern scholarship (312/311).

Though less significant, there is a dispute as to how Alexander the Great fits-in with this Hellenistic dating era. Talmudic exegete, Rabbeinu Chananel, following ''Seder Olam'', alleged that the Seleucid era commenced in the 6th-year of the reign of Alexander the Great, and that there were 40 years from the building of the Second Temple (during the reign of the Persian king Darius the Great) until the 6th year of the reign of Alexander the Great, namely, in 312 BCE. According to Rabbeinu Chananel, this 40-year period marked the building of the Second Temple under Darius the Great in 352 BCE and the beginning of Grecian hegemony over Israel in 312 BCE. Modern-day chroniclers assign different dates for Alexander's reign.

Josephus contends differently, writing in his work ''Against Apion'' 1.22 that Alexander the Great died in the 114th Olympiad, after reigning 12 years. If so, the 114th Olympiad would have corresponded with about 326 BCE, or what was then 15 years before they began to make use of the Seleucid era counting! Others put his death in 323 BCE, 12 years before the start of the Seleucid era. It is said that the Jews started this system of reckoning the years, in recognition of Alexander the Great who passed through their country and who received warmly the Jewish High Priest who came out to greet him. Others say that the introduction of this new era was in commemoration of the year in which Seleucus I reconquered Babylon.

The advantage of the Seleucid era counting system is that dates marked in this era do not require later synchronization with the BC / AD era configurations based on kings' reigns, configurations added later by modern chroniclers when trying to fixate the regnal years of various kings. Rather, all that was required of the Seleucid era counting was to simply convert it into the date used in the Common Era, without consideration for the rest. While the Seleucid Era counting has been abandoned in the writing of legal deeds, promissory notes, court attestations, etc., it is still relied upon by all observant Jews when determining the 2nd Temple's destruction.The Radbaz Commentary (compiled in c. 1561 CE) states on Maimonides' ''H. Shemita veyovel'': "On this calculation have all the people of the land of Israel relied… The opinion of our Master (Maimonides) it is the correct one, and is that which is practised in all our borders" (End Quote). It is also considered very reliable when seeking to determine dates of events in relation to the Common Era, making for a more precise fixation of an event.

Another reason for the popularity of the Seleucid era counting amongst Jews is that the commencement of the Seleucid era was seen as a key fixed point of reference, being, according to ''Seder Olam'', 1,000 years after the giving of the law at Sinai, or, precisely one-thousand years after Israel's departure out of Egypt.

Typically, a Jewish date is only informative if it can be identified in relation to some other point of reference, in this case, usually another calendar. Today, however, Jews make use of the era known as Anno Mundi, the "era of creation," in their transaction of dates.

Second Temple: Its years of duration and year of destruction

Jewish tradition holds that the Second Temple stood for 420 years. The same Jewish tradition holds that the Second Temple was destroyed in the lunar month Av (August), in the year 68 of the Common Era (rather than in year 70), naturally implying that the Second Temple was built in the year 352 BCE. Since it was during the reign of the Persian king, Darius the Great (Darius b. Hystaspes), that the Second Temple was constructed (), in the sixth-year of his reign, the timeframe given for this Persian king in Jewish chronology (whose reign, accordingly, began in 358 BCE) stands at variance with the time-frame given for the same king in conventional chronology (who is said to have reigned between 521 BCE–486 BCE), a 163-year disparity.

Jews have traditionally held the view that the date in which they are to reckon the 2nd Temple's destruction is the year which preceded the 380th year of the Seleucid era, also known as the Year of Alexander (a date which corresponds to anno 69 CE). This means the destruction of the 2nd Temple fell out in the lunar month of Av in the 379th year of the Seleucid era counting (Year of Alexander), or what corresponds to ''anno'' 68 CE.

The two most ancient historical sources used to support this tradition are the Jewish historian Josephus, citing the ''Book of Maccabees'', and the Aramaic '' Scroll of Antiochus'' (compiled, according to Saadia Gaon, by the elders of the Schools of Hillel and Shammai). The ''Scroll of Antiochus'' would have been written in the early first century CE, before Suetonius wrote his ''Lives of the Caesars''. However, there is a proclivity among modern-day chroniclers to bypass these Jewish sources, in favor of others.

According to the Aramaic ''Scroll of Antiochus'', from the Second Temple's rebuilding till the 23rd year of the reign of Antiochus Eupator, son of Antiochus Epiphanes who invaded Judaea, there had transpired 213 years in total (i.e. since the Second Temple's construction under Darius). Quoting verbatim from that ancient Aramaic record:

::
::(Literal translation: ''In the twenty third year of his kingdom, in the two-hundred and thirteenth year of the rebuilding of this, God's house, he (Antiochus Eupator) put his face to go up to Jerusalem.'')

This time period given for Antiochus Eupator's reign is taken in conjunction with another record mentioned by Josephus, in his ''Antiquities of the Jews'' (12.9.2.). Based on Josephus' record, who cites from the ''First Book of Maccabees'' (6:16), Antiochus Eupator began his reign after his father's death (Antiochus Epiphanes) in ''anno'' 149 of the Seleucid era (= 162 BCE). Twenty-three years into Antiochus Eupator's reign would have then been ''anno'' 172 of the Seleucid Era, or what was then 139 BCE. Since, according to the Scroll of Antiochus, the Second Temple had already been standing 213 years, this means that the Second Temple was completed in ''anno'' 352 BCE, being what was then the 6th year of the reign of Darius the king (i.e. Darius, the son of Hystaspes), the year in which the king finished its building according to Ezra 6:15. Jewish tradition, which assigns 420 years to its duration, means that its destruction occurred in 68 CE.

Although this date of the Temple's rebuilding largely disagrees with modern scholarship who base their chronologies upon the Babylonian Chronicles and its rebuilding in 516 BCE when Darius I was thought to have reigned, it has, nonetheless, long been held by religious Jewish circles as being accurate and reliable, since it is founded upon a tradition passed down generation after generation. Modern scholars seek to rectify this apparent disparity in time by saying that "the Darius in whose reign the Second Temple was built, was not Darius I, as is commonly supposed, but Darius II." In this case, the chronology thus established is in striking agreement with certain chronological data or implications in Josephus and rabbinic literature. If, however, the Darius in whose reign the Second Temple was built was Darius I, the date of its construction must, of necessity, be pulled back earlier to 516 BCE.

Counter-arguments against Seder Olam

The Greek historian Herodotus lived from ''circa'' 484 BCE to 425 BCE, and wrote about the dynastic history of four Persian kings in nine books: Cyrus (557–530 BCE, Book 1); Cambyses (530-522 BCE, Book 2 and part of Book 3); Darius (521-486 BCE, the rest of Book 3 and Books 4,5,6); and Xerxes (486-479 BCE, Books 7, 8, 9).

One of the strongest counter-arguments that can be made against ''Seder Olam'' and its demarcations in time is that, if the Second Temple was completed in the 6th year of the reign of Darius the Great, as noted by the Hebrew scriptures