This article relates to the issue of the 480 years quoted in 1 Kings 6:1, in relation to the Exodus and the Building of Solomon's Temple. It is in fact an 'excerpt' from Chapter 14 of the King's Calendar, and is part of a side argument to establishing the Birth year of Abraham.
In order to do that, an explanation was necessary for the differences between the Masorete and Septuagint versions of 1 King's 6:1 which relates that the Israelites came out of Egypt either 480 or 440 years before the commencement of the Building of Solomon's Temple.
And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
Most commentators include the Exodus within the 480 years.
To this we add 130 years for the Age of Jacob upon entering Egypt during the famine, plus another 60 years for the age of Isaac at Jacob's birth, and finally, 100 years for the age of Abraham at Isaac's birth.
It seems quite simple. Unfortunately there are some complications.
The issue of counting back 480 years from Solomon's 4th year as per 1 King's 6:1, contains within it two problematical details.
The First Complication:
The First complication is in determining the intended application of the reference.
According to the authorised version, 1 King's 6:1, tells us that Solomon's 4th year is the 480th year since the Israelites came out of the land of Egypt. The Septuagint however tells us that it is the 440 th. Year.
The usual explanation for this contradiction is that the Septuagint records only the years since entry into Canaan while the authorised version includes the Forty (40) years in the wilderness, and thus is a reference to the exodus itself. If this were the case and the 'King's Calendar' date for Solomon's 4th year (970 BCE) were accurate, these differing chronological references would in fact be referring to the years 1410 BCE and 1450 BCE respectively. Whilst this seems logical, the 'King's Calendar' indicates that both texts, despite divergent renderings, refer to the same event in 1412 BCE.
The Authorised version is recorded in artificial years and the Septuagint is a solar year reference, and both refer to the entrance into Canaan in 1412 BCE. The Exodus occurs forty years earlier in 1449 BCE.
The 'King's Calendar' proposition is that the Septuagint rendering is an 'original' reference, not yet altered in the accepted text of the mid-third century when the Septuagint was composed. A few examples of this have already been encountered, specifically in relation to the Omrides.
The Second Complication:
The other problem in relation to our task in this chapter, is that from the 'King's Calendar' perspective, these two different references only 'reasonably agree'.
When 480 artificial years are converted into solar years, the result is 443 years, not the 440 years which appear in the Septuagint, and conversely, the number of artificial years to transpire over 440 solar years is 477 years, not the 480 years of the Masorete. There is a three year discrepancy.
It is difficult to reconcile this discrepancy given that the contention of the 'King's Calendar' is that the Septuagint's use of solar years 'must' be the original and true chronological record. The most obvious explanation for the discrepancy is that the original 440 year solar reference involved the time elapsing between entry into Canaan and Solomon's first year, not his fourth year.
While both synchronise their chronologies with Solomon's 4th year, the Septuagint does not exactly read the same as the Authorised.
Reference to the fourth year is duplicated in the Septuagint, and is thus redundant. It may be that the original verse indicated firstly that 440 years transpired between entrance into Canaan and the commencement of Solomon's reign, and then indicated that in his fourth (4th) year he commenced building the temple.
In that case, the Masorete containing the artificial years, ignored reference to the commencement of Solomon's reign, but correctly synchronised his Fourth (4th) year with the 480 th year in Canaan. At some later date perhaps, the 440 year Septuagint reference was altered and similarly linked.
This then would be the contention of the 'King's Calendar' that there were 440 Solar years elapsed between Israelite entrance into Canaan in 1412 BCE, and the commencement of Solomon's reign, and 480 artificial years between 1412 BCE and Solomon's Fourth (4th) year.
The issue of the 440 or 480 years in 1 Kings 6:1 has more significance than at first appears, when considered in tandem with information provided in the Book of Judges. (The Period of the Judges.)
The Book of Judges provides an incomplete list of the judgeships in, and periods of oppression against, Israel and yet still manages to record 450 years worth of seemingly consecutive data between the parameters of the 1 King 6:1 Reference.
Whilst there are definite Biblical chronological references for David and Solomon, there are only extra-Biblical records upon which we can rely in determining the time periods for Joshua, Samuel and Saul. These indicate that Joshua was judge for up to 28 years; that Samuel was judge for 30 years; and that Saul reigned up to 22 years. A total of between 60 and 80 years.
This increases the 450 years listed in the Book of Judges to between 510 and 530 years. To these 510 or 530 years must be added the 40 years for David and the first 3 or maybe 4 years of Solomon's reign, to give us a total of between 554 and 574 years to elapse between the Israelite entrance into Canaan and (incl.) the 4th year of Solomon.
1 King's 6:1 says that either 440 or 480 years elapsed during these 554 -574 years.
Whether one wants to follow the Septuagint or Masorete is irrelevant unless one can first deal with the contradictory nature of 1 Kings 6:1.
Primary Text Reading.
(Primary Text here will refer to
the actual words that appear in the English translation.)
The primary text reading of 1 Kings 6:1 in both versions, is that the parameters of the time period mentioned, are the actual
Entry of the People of Israel into Canaan,
and
the commencement of the building of Solomon's Temple.
It is only because the two figures differ by 40 years, that it has been assumed, that the Septuagint is correct in it's reference to Entrance into Canaan and that the Masoretic version has been altered to include the 40 years of wandering.
However, the King's Calendar artificial calendar demonstrates the opposite. The King's Calendar dates for the Exodus, Entrance into Canaan and Solomon's 4th year are in keeping with every other traditional scholastic source, and yet it fits 480 years into the 440 solar year time frame suggested by the Septuagint version.
It goes one step further however to suggest that the Septuagint was altered and that in it's original form, it read that 440 years transpired between Entrance into Canaan and Solomon's 1st year (when he announced his intention to build the temple).
And it came to pass in the four hundred and fortieth year after the departure of the children of Israel out of Egypt, in the fourth year and second month of the reign of King Solomon over Israel, that the king commanded that they should take great and costly stones for the foundation of the house, and hewn stones. And the men of Solomon, and the men of Hiram hewed the stones, and laid them for a foundation. In the fourth year he laid the foundation of the house of the Lord, in the month of Ziv, in the second month. In the eleventh year in the eighth month, the house was completed....
Note the redundant reference to the 'fourth year'. Solomon's commandment to build a temple is given in the same listed year as the foundations were laid. Is that not odd?
The King's Calendar Determination.
The King's Calendar suggests that the original (Masoretic) version read that:
440 solar years transpired
Between Entrance into Canaan and
Solomon's first year when he commissioned the building of the Temple.
Later, when the redactors inserted the artificial chronological details into Israel's history, they changed the details to:
480 years transpired
Between Entrance into Canaan and
Solomon's 4th year when the foundations of the Temple were laid.
The round figure of 480 years neatly fitted in with the 4th year of Solomon when the temple foundation was laid and was therefore a much better chronological reference.
At some point thereafter, having noticed the discrepancy between the Masorete and the Septuagint versions, someone corrected the Septuagint version, (changing 1st year to 4th year), having made the same assumption that many make today (that the Masorete includes the 40 years of Wandering).
Discrepancy between Book of Judges and 1 Kings 6:1
The inherent incongruence in the data contained in the Book of Judges, can succinctly be explained as one transcription error and one current day misapplication of the data.
Ehud's judgeship was most probably 18 years not 80 years, (The Period of the Judges) and the Oppression listed in Judges Chapter 13 was obviously concurrent with the reign of Samson (including 20 years either side of his judgeship.)
However it must be pointed out here, that the remaining balance of data in Solar years, is still excessive.
Using the King's Calendar artificial construct however, reduces the overall value of the data, and the period of the Judges does then compactly fit into 480 artificial years, just as the Masoretic version 1 Kings 6:1 actually states.
I hope you have enjoyed reading this article.
(There is more to read after the bibliography.)
R.P.BenDedek
Bibliography and related articles
Eisenman R.H., Wise.M. (1992) The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered U.K.Element Books. pp.92/93
Grimal.N. (1992, p. 392) Assumed to be from "A History of Ancient Egypt" [Reference not in K.C. Bibliography.]
Marston. C. (1935) The Bible is true: The lessons of the 1925-34 excavations in Bible lands summarized and explained. Australia. Angus and Robertson.
The Premise: Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE), Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
When the Synchronous Chronological Data provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles for the Divided Kingdom Period are measured in years of 336 days, the synchronisms actually align. [Refer to Appendix Five to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]
General formula for Biblical Data conversion:
The formula for constructing the artificial calendar was:
'X' times 364 equals 'Y' days
'Y' days divided by 336 equals 'Z' artificial years.
Values are:
'X' = any given number of 'real/solar' years
364 = perceived days in the sectarian calendar
'Y' = number of days calculated
336 = number of days in an artificial year
'Z' = artificial years = 1.083'X' and represents the original number of the converted years plus 8%.
To reverse the process by hand:
'Z' years times 336 equals 'Y' divided by 364 equals the Number of 'X' years converted.
To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5:Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE:
The Principle of Linear Causality
The King's Calendar is a very simple approach to Biblical Chronology. It substitutes a value of 336 days for every year listed in Scripture. As far as the Divided Kingdom is concerned, when you use this 336 day year value, the synchronisms actually work. To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5: Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE
Because it is a mathematical system, the King's Calendar must abide by certain mathematical rules, the most important of which, is that if you change any date for any day, month, or year every other day, month, or year is effected and must also change. It's like a 'domino effect'. Chronological references cannot be 'forced' to fit, and nor can they simply be ignored or 'compressed' as is the usual case with historians and archaeologists.
If any King's Calendar chronological determination disagrees with anything in the history books, it must argue the case as to why the history books are wrong, or why the evidence for an assertion is untrustworthy. If the King's Calendar successfully defends its' position, then the history books cannot be treated as definitive, and if the King's Calendar is 'proven' wrong, then every other chronological reference it provides is also wrong.
Because of this, the King's Calendar Chronological Reconstruction of Israel's history is unique, in that its' methodology can be scientifically (mathematically) tested and demonstrated to be either true or false. Its' chronological predictions are able to be 'proved' or 'disproved'.
R.P.BenDedek is from Brisbane Australia and is the author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' at http://www.kingscalendar.com His academic articles set forth Apologetics for and results of his discovery of an "artificial chronological scheme" running through the Bible, Josephus, the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Seder Olam Rabbah.
He writes photographic 'Stories from China' and social editorial commentaries, both at KingsCalendar, and as a contributing newspaper columnist. He currently teaches Conversational English in China and in addition to his English Lessons at KingsCalendar, he has created specific sites for Students of English.
In a new series entitled Seder Olam Rabbah, the King's Calendar is investigating 'other' 'extra biblical' chronological systems, and compares them to Josephus and the King's calendar.
The first 3 of the Series are listed below. The issue of 1 Kings 6:1 is central to much of what is discussed.
