Sky & Telescope November 1981 [antikvár]

The Chronology of Archbishop James UssherRonald Lane Reese, Steven M. Everett, and Edwin D. Craun, Washington and Lee UniversityMost astronomers have heard ofthe famous 17th century biblical chronology of Archbishop James Ussher. who set October 23. 4004 b.c., as the date of the Creation. The date is mentioned in many astronomy books, usually as a humorous introduction to discussions of modern cosmologies. However, just a little over a century ago. 4004 b.c. was widely accepted in all seriousness as the year the world and the universe began. Ussher's chronology remained in vogue for over 200 years, much longer than current "revisionist" theories of the Big Bang have been in existence.History abounds with biblical chronologies. Alphonse des Vignolles. in the preface to his Chronologie de I'histoire sainte (1738), asserts he collected over 200 different computations for the date of Creation. ranging from a relatively recent 3483 b.c. to a more distant 6984 b.c. This wide variety of results stems in part from the use of different sources, alternate versions of the Bible, and varying assumptions about the length of a typical human generation. In this sea of biblical chronologies, however, that of Archbishop Ussher reigned supreme, primarily because in 1701 an unknown authority inserted those dates into the margins of the King James version of the Bible. As recently as the turn of the 20th century. Bibles were still being printed with Ussher's dates. Several numerical coincidences associated with the number 4004 also con-tributed to the widely held legitimacy of his chronology.Ussher's chronology reflects several features common to many biblical methods for arriving at the date of Creation: a curious fascination for and integration of numerology. astronomy and scripture. Precision was a common thread in such calculations; thus Ussher's conclusion that "the beginning of time . . . fell on the beginning of the night which preceded the 23rd day of October, in the year 710 of the Julian Period (4004 b.c.)" was by no means atypical. The date 4004 b.c. is not unique to Ussher, according to J. D. North of Oxford University, but is at least as old as St. Basil the Great (a.d. 330-79). The number, as in most biblical chronologies, is derived from the standard technique of adding biblical generations. Early biblical chronologists accepted an average of three generations per century, even when the ages of individuals are given. Occasionally, one had to reckon by the reigns of various rulers, which were taken to average 22 years In length.One can also see in Ussher's work the in-tluence of the common belief that God arranged the universe so that the Sun was at one of the solstices or equinoxes at the precise moment of Creation. This view was apparently so eminently reasonable at the time as to be beyond question, even though the Sun was allegedly created four days later!Proponents of such specific instants basedtheir arguments upon imaginative logic. For example, the autumnal equinox was the appropriate time because autumn was associated with harvests and the garden of Eden was, therefore, ready with provisions for Adam and Eve. Ussher set the date of the first day nearest the autumnal equinox of 4004 b.c which would have been late October in the Julian calendar. Other chronologists, such as J. J. Scaliger, pinpointed the Creation at the vernal equinox, the time of regeneration and birth. For Kepler and Longomontanus, the appropriate time was the summer solstice both thought the solar apogee was at the head of Aries at the moment of Creation, with the Sun in Cancer. From the known rate at which the apogee moved, they extrapolated back in time to the dates 3993 b.c. and 3964 b.c., respectively, incredibly close to the date that Ussher computed a half century later.Two curious numerical coincidences added an air of authenticity to Ussher's date. Creation at that time meant that the days of the first week repeated their order in (he calendar of a.d. I (since 4004 is divisible by 28, the length of the solar cycle of the calendar). Edward Greswell wrote in 1852. "it is no accidental coincidence that b.c. 4004 was the first year of the cycle of 28 " Perhaps, according to North, Ussher chose the date "in preference to numbers close to it, which could have been fitted to the Bible equally well, for the very reason that it