was married to a daughter of Neri; after which, the two lines, having been previously united in Zerubbabel, would again begin to diverge, through Abiud and Resa, down to Joseph, and to Eli, respectively. This union of the lines in his person was doubtless the effect of the special providence of God. Zerubbabel was the most illustrious of the Jews who returned from captivity; and altogether the fittest, among the posterity of David, to become the founder of the line of the Messias afresh. He was, moreover, himself a type of Christ. Nor were the families of Solomon and Nathan so likely, perhaps, to have been united, at any time, as during the captivity. The Zerubbabel who is mentioned as the son of Pedaiah, and consequently as a grandson of Jechonias k, it is reasonable to presume, on many accounts, was a different person from Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel. I. A grandson of Jechonias, by Pedaiah, must have been a younger person than a grandson through Salathiel. II. Among the posterity of this Zerubbabel, neither Abiud nor Resa are mentioned, though many others are. III. The identity of the name would be no objection-for bearing a distinct reference merely to the place of a person's birth, and to the circumstances of his family at the time, it might have been given to others, born during the captivity in Babylon, as well as to one. IV. If there had been only one Zerubbabel, the author of the book of Ezra, who designates him there by his proper relation to Salathiel, and is believed to have compiled the book of Chronicles, would have designated him so here likewise. Again; If Salathiel was born B. C. 598. or 597. there is this number of years to the time of the birth of Christ—to fill up which period St. Luke's genealogy, (independent of the two names rejected,) from Salathiel to Joseph, who stands in the same relation to Eli as Mary, inclusive of both, exhibits nineteen persons—and from Salathiel to the birth of Christ, nineteen generations-which is an average i Hagg. g. ii. 23. Zech. iii. 8. 9. iv. 6—10. vi. 12. 13. k 1 Chron. iii. 19. of thirty-one years and one half to each; no very improbable duration; for the age of thirty was as common an age of marriage for males, as fourteen or fifteen was for females; of which many instances might be produced. Μήτε τριηκόντων ἐτέων μάλα πόλλ ̓ ἀπολείπων, Μήτ' ἐπιθεὶς μάλα πολλά· γάμος δέ τοι ὥριος οὗτος 1. And as the family of Mary became gradually more and more reduced in circumstances, early marriages would become so much the less frequent among them. Within the same period, dated from the close of the captivity B. C. 536. down to the time of Alcimus, appointed high-priest by Antiochus Eupator, B. C. 163–162.m Josephus reckons up fifteen high-priests", including Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, who was already arrived at man's estate, when the return from captivity took place. Jozadak, the father of Jeshua, was carried into captivity along with Seraiah his father, eleven years after B. C. 599. that is, in B. C. 588.P Jeshua is not mentioned at this time; but the sons of Jeshua are mentioned Ezra iii. 9—which from iii. 8. it appears is the second year after the return, or B. C. 535. If so, Jeshua himself was born about B. C. 588-whence to B. C. 163. or 162. are about 426 years; which allows to fourteen generations an average of thirty years and six months each. To fill up the same period, in the genealogy of St. Matthew, from Salathiel to Joseph, inclusive of both, there are but twelve names in all-and from the time of the birth of Salathiel, B. C. 598. to the time of the birth of Joseph, which, if he was fifty years old at the time of the birth of Christ, would be about B. C. 54. there would be only eleven generations, the average of which, to the intervening period of 544 years, would be as much as fifty years each. It is not improbable, therefore, that some names may have fallen out here and it is a curious circumstance that, if the four names which appear to have crept, over and above the proper number, into the corresponding portions of St. Luke's account, had belonged originally to St. Matthew's, the num n xx. x. 1 Hesiod. Opera et Dies. 694. m Ant. Jud. xii. ix. 3. 7. ⚫ 1 Chron. vi. 14. 15. 2 Kings xxv. 18. P 2 Kings xxiv. 18. xxv. 2. 1 ber of generations from Salathiel to Joseph would have been fifteen; at an average of about thirty-six years each: which might have squared sufficiently well with St. Luke's. There are not wanting, however, instances where a few generations are seen to have taken up a great number of years. I could illustrate this circumstance from the Old Testament, compared with Josephus, in several places; but I shall be satisfied to illustrate it from his account of his own pedigree. Matthias, surnamed i Kupròs, between whom and Josephus there were just three generations-Josephus, Matthias, Josephus —was born in the first year of John Hyrcanus, that is, A. U. 619. or B. C. 135. From this time to the year of the birth of Josephus, which was the first of Caius, A. U. 790. are 171 years; which, divided by three, gives an average of fifty-seven years to each. But this interval must be still further enlarged. Between the birth of Josephus, A. U. 790. and the birth of his father Matthias, in the tenth of Archelaus, A. U. 760. there are but thirty years. Between the birth of this Matthias, A. U. 760. and the birth of his father, Josephus, in the ninth of Queen Alexandra, A. U. 687. there are seventy-three: and between the birth of this Josephus, in A. U. 687. and the birth of his father, Matthias Kuptòs, A. U. 619. there are sixty-eight. The fact is that men may have children at fifty, sixty, or seventy, as well as at twenty, thirty, or forty -and a given line of descent may be carried on in the one case, as well as in the other. Generations, of about thirty years each, will then only apply, when the calculation is made on the supposition of marriages at a regular time, and of descents in the regular way, from a father to his eldest son. It is not impossible, therefore, that eleven generations only might still have taken up a period of 550 years. If there have been omissions, at least, in this part of St. Matthew's genealogy, I think they must come after Azor, the fourth name from Salathiel on the one hand, and before Matthan, the second name from Joseph, on the other; which materially diminishes the chances of any such omissions at all. Matthan stood second in the time of Africanuss-and Azor, I think, was contemporary with Nehemiah; or is the same person who is mentioned by him, among the heads of the people, under the name of Azzurt, which the Seventy render by 'Aloúp. Nehemiah was sent to Jerusalem in the twentieth of Artaxerxes", B. C. 444. just ninety-two years after the return, B. C. 536; at which time Azor was manifestly arrived at man's estate. Let us suppose that Abiud, the grandfather of Azor, was born soon after the return; which, if Zerubbabel himself was then in the flower of his age, is very likely to have been the case. From his birth to the birth of Zadok, when Azor might be thirty years old, we cannot reckon less than ninety years. It would seem from Nehemiah xii. 47. as if the government, of Zerubbabel had reached very near to the time of Nehemiah himself, or at least of Ezra, whose mission took place B. C. 458. If Zerubbabel was about thirty B. C. 536. and had lived to be eighty or ninety years old, he would have died not many years before the arrival of the latter. age, or the This conclusion is further supported by the following coincidence also. A son of Joiada, and grandson of Eliashib, was contemporary with Nehemiah, and already of a marriageable age, in the thirty-second year of Artaxerxes, that is, B. C. 432. Now Eliashib was the grandson of Jeshua", as this son was of Eliashib. The father of Eliashib was Joiakim, and Joiakim (one of the sons, and probably the oldest, of the sons of Jeshua) was not only born, but arrived at man's estate, B. C. 535. the year after the return. This Joiakim succeeded to Jeshua in the priesthood, and Eliashib succeeded to Joiakim. Now in the seventh of Artaxerxes, Eliashib was already high-priest; and, consequently, Joiakim was dead. From B. C. 535. to the seventh of Artaxerxes, B. C. 458. there is an interval of seventy • Ut supra. - Ib. xii. 10. 11. t x. 17. u j. I. ji. r. x. 18. y Ezra x. 6. Neh. xiii. 28. seven years; whence, if Joiakim had been thirty at the first of those extremes, he would have been one hundred and seven at the latter. It is probable, then, that he was dead before even the first, and much more the seventh, of Arta xerxes. His age, therefore, at the return, would be on a par with that of Zerubbabel; and Eliashib, the son of this Joiakim, would correspond, in the line of descent, to Abiud the son of Zerubbabel. It is manifest, therefore, that a grandson of Eliashib would answer to a grandson of Abiud; the latter of whom was Azor, and the former was some son of Joiada, whose name is not mentioned; and both, contemporary with Nehemiah. Moreover, as Azor was now arrived at man's estate, so was this grandson of Eliashib; for the former was among the heads of the people, and the latter was married to a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite. There is no proof, however, in any part of the book of Nehemiah, which is to be considered his own production, that he was contemporary with any of the descendants of Jeshua beyond this grandson of Eliashib, or the third generation after the return from captivity; which being the case, it is abundantly sufficient to convince us that the Artaxerxes, within whose reign his mission fell, was Artaxerxes Longimanus, the first of that name, and not Artaxerxes Mnemon, the second who bore it. The reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus began B. C. 464; that of Artaxerxes Mnemon B. C. 405. and the twentieth year of the former began B. C. 445; the twentieth year of the latter, B. C. 386. and his thirty-second, B. C. 374. Now Eliashib, born, as we supposed, directly after the return from captivity, was alive not only in the seventh, but as late as the thirty-second, year this Artaxerxes. This might be the case B. C. 433. the thirty-second of Artaxerxes Longimanus; but is absolutely incredible of B. C. 374. the thirty-second of Artaxerxes Mnemon, as much as sixty years later. Though Eliashib had been born as early as B. C. 535. he would still be only 2 Ezra x. 6. Nehem. iii. 1. xiii. 4—6. of |