Seder Olam Rabbah

In the Babylonian Talmud this chronicle is several times referred to simply as Seder Olam,[3] and it is quoted as such by the more ancient biblical commentators, including Rashi. But starting in the 12th century, it began to be designated as Seder Olam Rabbah to distinguish it from a later, smaller chronicle, Seder Olam Zuṭa; it was first so designated by Abraham ben Nathan Ha-Yarhi.[4]

In its present form, Seder Olam Rabbah consists of 30 chapters, each 10 chapters forming a section or "gate."

The work is a chronological record, extending from Adam to the revolt of Bar Kokba in the reign of Hadrian, the Persian period being compressed into 52 years.[2] The chronicle is complete only up to the time of Alexander the Great; the period from Alexander to Hadrian occupies a very small portion of the work—the end of the 30th chapter.

Many passages quoted in the Talmud are missing in the edition of Seder Olam which has survived.

The author probably designed the work for calendrical purposes, to determine the era of the creation; his system, adopted as early as the 3rd century CE, is still followed.[5] Adhering closely to the Pharisaic interpretations of Bible texts, he endeavored not only to elucidate many passages, but also to determine certain dates which are not indicated in the Bible, but which may be inferred by calculation. He also recognized the importance of the Jubilee and Sabbatical cycles as a long-term calendrical system, and attempted at various places to fit the Sabbatical and Jubilee years into its chronological scheme.

In many cases, however, he gave the dates according to tradition, and inserted, besides, the sayings and halakhot of preceding rabbis and of his contemporaries. In discussing biblical chronology he followed three principles:[5]

1. To assume that the intention of the biblical author was, wherever possible, to give exact dates
2. To assign to each of a series of events the shortest possible duration of time, where necessary, in order to secure agreement with the biblical text
3. To adopt the lesser of two possible numbers.

The Jewish calendar's reference point is traditionally considered to be about one year before the creation of the world.

The current Hebrew calendar year numbering system, which counts years from the creation, has been in use for more than 1000 years.[6] The dating system of numbering the years from creation was adopted sometime before 3925 Anno Mundi (165 CE), and based on the calculation of Rabbi Yose ben Halafta during about 160 CE in the book Seder Olam Rabbah.[7]

These years are based on the computations of dates and periods found in the Hebrew Bible. In Jewish tradition, "Year 1" is considered to have begun on the 25 of Elul, 5 days before the beginning of "Year 2" on the first of Tishrei, when Adam was created. The new moon of its first month (Tishrei) is designated molad tohu (meaning new moon of chaos or nothing). By Halafta's calculation Adam was created during the year 3761 BCE.[8] However, Seder Olam Rabbah treats the creation of Adam as the beginning of "Year Zero". This results in a two-year discrepancy between the years given in Seder Olam Rabbah and the Jewish year used now. For example, Seder Olam Rabbah gives the year of the Exodus from Egypt as 2448 AM; but, according to the current system, the year would be 2450 AM.

Despite the computations by Yose ben Halafta, confusion persisted for a long time as to how the calculations should be applied.[9] During 1000, for example, the Muslim chronologist al-Biruni noted that three different epochs were used by various Jewish communities being one, two, or three years later than the modern epoch.[10] The epoch seems to have been settled by 1178, when Maimonides, in his work Mishneh Torah, described all of the modern rules of the Hebrew calendar, including the modern epochal year. His work has been accepted by Jews as definitive, though it does not correspond to the scientific calculations. For example, the Jewish year for the destruction of the First Temple has traditionally been given as 3338 AM or 423/2 BC.[11] This differs from the modern scientific year, which is usually expressed using the Proleptic Julian calendar as 587 BC. The scientific date takes into account evidence from the ancient Babylonian calendar and its astronomical observations. So, too, according to Jewish computation, the destruction of the Second Temple occurred in the lunar month of Av in anno 68 CE, rather than in 70 CE.[12] In this and related cases, a difference between the traditional Jewish year and a scientific date in a Gregorian year or in a proleptic Julian calendar date results from a disagreement about when the event happened—and not simply a difference between the Jewish and Gregorian calendars (see the "Missing Years" in the Jewish Calendar and below, Excursus: Jewish Chronology in the Scroll of Antiochus).

In Jewish thought the counting is usually considered to be from the creation of the world, as has been emphasized in many ancient texts dealing with creation chronology, viz. that the six days of creation till man are literal days—including the days before the creation of the sun and earth.[13][14] However, some understand these days metaphorically.[15]

According to Seder Olam, the 70-year period spoken of by Jeremiah 25:11, Jeremiah 29:10 and Daniel 9:2 began in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, in 441 BCE,[93] and ended in the year 370 BCE, with the beginning of the return of the exiles under Cyrus.[94]

Aside from the disparity between the traditional Jewish method of dating Nebuchadnezzar's year of ascension (put at 441 BCE) and the conventional method of dating for Nebuchadnezzar's first-year of reign (put at 605 BCE) – a disparity of 164 years, there are also historic discrepancies in the chronological list of successive Babylonian kings mentioned by Seder Olam. Seder Olam's assignment of regnal years for the Babylonian kings in that period differs from those assigned by Berossus the Chaldean for the same period. The major difference being that in Seder Olam's chronology (which teaching is followed by the Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 11b) the seventy-year period was defined by only three Babylonian kings, namely: Nebuchadnezzar who reigned 45 years, Evil-merodach who reigned 23 years and Belshazzar who reigned 3 (for a total of 71 years, with one year deducted[95][96]), whereas Berossus mentions five Babylonian kings for the same period, and that Nebuchadnezzar reigned only 43 years,[97] followed by Evil-merodach who reigned 2 years, who, in turn, was succeeded by Neriglissar who reigned 4 years, followed by Laborosoarchod who reigned 9 months, and, finally, by Nabonnedus (also known as Belshazzar)[98] who reigned 17 years (for a total of 67 years). It is presumed that the author of Seder Olam had not seen the ancient chronological record of Berossus who lists these five Babylonian kings by name, and that the author of Seder Olam copied only those names of Babylonian kings that he could glean from the Hebrew Scriptures, without any knowledge of the fact that the Hebrew Scriptures had merely mentioned those kings directly related to major events in Jewish history, while omitting the rest.[99] Moreover, the actual number of years given for the kings' individual reigns is not mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, and is only had either through the record of Berossus, as transmitted by Josephus, or else by those contradictory figures given in the Talmud.

The Babylonian kings' list in Seder Olam is explained by medieval biblical exegete Saadia Gaon (892–942). In his Judeo-Arabic commentary on the Book of Daniel (9:2), he begins by explaining what is meant by accomplishing "seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem," saying that this seventy-year period refers not to the destruction of Jerusalem, per se, but rather to the Kingdom of Babylon,[100] in accordance with the biblical verse: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will remember you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place" (Jeremiah 29:10).[100] Saadia wrote that these seventy years begin with Nebuchadnezzar's ascension to the throne and that he reigned 45 years, and that his son Evil-merodach reigned after him 23 years, and that his son's son after him reigned 3 years, for a total of seventy years.[100][101] The way in which the rabbis derived 45 years for Nebuchadnezzar's reign was by calculating the beginning of the reign of Evil-merodach which was thought to have been in the 37th year of Jehoiachin's captivity, in accordance with the verse (Jeremiah 52:31): "In the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the twenty-fifth day of the month, Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the year of his kingship, he freed Jehoiachin king of Judah and brought him out of prison." The same event is explained in 2 Kings 25:27 as meaning that Jehoiachin was released "in the year that he (Evil-merodach) began to reign" (Hebrew: בשנת מלכו).[102] When Jehoiachin was first exiled in 433 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had already been in power eight years;[100][103] (hence: 8 + 37 = 45). At any rate, Evil-merodach is thought by Seder Olam to have begun his reign in 396 BCE, when Jehoiachin was released from his bonds.

Saadia explains, moreover, how Seder Olam derived 23 years, instead of Berossus' 2 years, for Evil-merodach's reign, saying that since the third-year of Belshazzar's reign is referenced in the Scripture[104] and he is thought by the author of Seder Olam to have died in the third-year of his reign,[105] although the Book of Daniel does not say explicitly that Belshazzar died in the third-year of his reign,[106] it stands to reason that the years in between Nebuchadnezzar's 45-year reign and Belshazzar's 3-year reign, at the least, is collected as 23 years, during which time Evil-merodach reigned.[107] The Talmud refers to this as "deductive reasoning" (Hebrew: גמרא).[108] Belshazzar was thought by the author of Seder Olam to be the mere grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, based on the Scripture: "All the nations shall serve him (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar) and his son (i.e. Evil-merodach) and his grandson, etc." (Jeremiah 27:7).[95] Chroniclers have largely rejected Seder Olam's method of assigning regnal years for the Babylonian kings and have relied, instead, on Berossus and on other archaeological records.[109] Still, the 164–165-year disparity between events described in rabbinic tradition and the same events using conventional dating methods has been the subject of intense debate, with Jewish scholars occasionally taking sides.

Assuming that this Seder Olam is the same as the Seder Olam mentioned in the Talmud, Jewish authorities generally ascribe its authorship to the well-known Talmudist Jose b. Halafta, on the strength of R. Johanan's statement, "The tanna of Seder Olam was R. Jose".[1] Johanan's comment is supported by the fact that Jose was known as one who occupied himself with Jewish chronology; further, many sayings of R. Jose's quoted in the Talmud are paralleled in Seder Olam.[5]

However, Ratner[167] said that Seder Olam often conflicts with Jose's opinions in the Talmud, that it refers to Jose in the third person ("R. Jose said"), and finally it mentions Talmudists who lived later than Jose. For these reasons, he concluded that Jose was not its author; he says that Jose was only the principal authority of Seder Olam, and that Johanan's statement, mentioned above, is similar to another statement he made—"Any anonymous opinion in the Mishnah belongs to Rabbi Meir",[168] although the redactor of the Mishnah was Judah I. Ratner further supposes that R. Johanan himself compiled the work, following generally the opinion of R. Jose. He tries to prove this by showing that many sayings of R. Johanan are taken from Seder Olam.[5]

Other scholars say that in Seder Olam Jose preserved the generally accepted opinions, even when they were contrary to his own, as indicated in Niddah 46b, and that, like all works of the ancient Talmudists, it underwent alternations in copying. Sometimes, finding that the utterance of a later rabbi agreed with Seder Olam, the copyists inserted the name of that rabbi. A careful examination shows that certain additions are later than the latest midrashim, and it may be that Abraham ibn Yarḥi,[169] Isaac Lattes,[170] and Menahem Meïri,[171] who seem to place the redaction of Seder Olam at the time when the Massektot (tractates) Derek Ereẓ Rabbah, the Derek Ereẓ Zuṭa, the Soferim, and other later treatises were composed, may have referred to the work in its present form.[5]

Besides directly quoting Seder Olam, the Talmud often alludes to it. A passage in Seder Olam (chapter 30) describing the 420 years of four hegemonic powers (Persian, Grecian, Hasmonean and Herodian) appears almost verbatim in the Babylonian Talmud.[172] Often, the phrases "tanya" (= "we learned"), "tana" (= "he learned"), "tanu rabbanan" (= "our teachers learned"), and "amar mar" (= "the teacher said") introduce sentences also found in Seder Olam. In addition, many of its passages have been taken into the Mishnah without any allusion to their source. Seder Olam is not mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud, although several passages in the latter are based on it. Finally, many of the sayings of Seder Olam have been taken into the Mekhilta, the Sifra, and the Sifre.[5]

Acceptance of Seder Olam Rabbah's chronology was not universal. Among the premodern sources whose chronologies contradict Seder Olam Rabbah are Pirkei deRabbi Eliezer, Josippon, Midrash Lekach Tov, a source quoted by Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Baal HaMaor, Radak, Rashba, Ritva, Ralbag, and Isaac Abarbanel.[173]

• Seder Olam Rabbah (in print) first appeared at Mantua, in 1514, together with the Seder Olam Zuta, the Megillat Ta'anit, and Abraham ibn David's Sefer ha-Ḳabbalah. It has been reedited several times since then.
• In 1577 Seder Olam Rabbah and Seder Olam Zuṭa were published in Paris, with a Latin translation by Gilbert Genebrard. The former was edited, with a Latin language translation, notes, and introduction, by John Meyer (Amsterdam, 1699).
• Commentaries on the work were written by Jacob Emden,[174] by Elijah Wilna,[175] and by Enoch Zundel b. Joseph.[176]
• The three latest editions prior to 1906 are those of Ratner,[177] A. Marx (who published the first ten chapters, basing the text upon different manuscripts and supplying it with a German language translation and an introduction; Berlin, 1903), and Jeroham Meïr Leiner (containing the commentaries of Jacob Emden and Elijah Wilna, and the editor's annotations under the title Me'r 'Ayin, Warsaw, 1904).
• Ben Halpetha, Jose (1971). M.D. Yerushalmi (ed.). Seder Olam Rabba (in Hebrew). Gil Publishers, in affiliation with the Haredi Youth Organization. OCLC 233091049.
• Heinrich W. Guggenheimer (2005), Seder Olam: The Rabbinic View of Biblical Chronology, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (ISBN 978-0-7657-6021-0)
• Chaim Milikowsky (2013), Seder Olam: Critical Edition, Commentary, and Introduction (2 vols.), Yad Ben-Zvi: Jerusalem (OCLC 857371834)(ISBN 9789652173591)

• Missing years (Jewish calendar)
• Traditional Jewish chronology

•  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Singer, Isidore; et al., eds. (1901–1906). "Seder 'Olam Rabbah". The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
• The Jewish Encyclopaedia cites the following works:
  • Fürst, in Orient, Lit. vii. 547 et seq.;
  • idem, Bibl. Jud. ii. 107–108;
  • Grätz, Gesch. 3d ed., iv. 184, and note 14;
  • A. Marx, introduction to his edition of the Seder Olam;
  • B. Ratner, Mabo leha-Seder Olam Rabbah;
  • Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. cols. 1433–1434;
  • Weiss, Dor, ii. 257 et seq.;
  • Winter and Wünsche, Die Jüdische Litteratur, iii. 299 et seq.;
  • Zunz, G. V. p. 85.
• Strack, H.L. (1991), Stemberger, Günter; Bockmuehl, Markus (eds.), Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash (Google eBook) (1996 ed.), Fortress Press, p. 326, ISBN 978-1451409147 (Note: page 326 in this edition was p. 354 in 1991).

• English translation of the Seder Olam (INCOMPLETE)
• Seder Olam Rabbah - Gilbert Génébrard's Latin translation (Paris 1578)
• Jewish Encyclopedia article for Seder Olam Rabbah