HOW OLD WAS JEHOIACHIN? 8 OR 18?
II CHRONICLES 36
9. Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.
9.
|1121| A son of
|8083| eight
|8141| years
|3078| Jehoiachin
|4427| when he began to rule,
|7967| and three
|3391| months
|6235| and ten
|3117| days
|4427| he ruled
|3389| in Jerusalem.
|6213| And he did
|7451| the evil
|5869| in the eyes of
|3068| Yahweh.
II KINGS 24
8. Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mothers name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
8.
|1121| A son of
|8083| eigh-
|6240| teen
|8141| years
|3078| Jehoiachin {was}
|4427| when he began to rule,
|7967| and three
|3391| months
|4427| he ruled
|3389| in Jerusalem.
|8034| And name
|0517| his mother's,
|5179| Nehushta
|1323| the daughter of
|0494| Elnathan
|3389| of Jerusalem.
9.
|6213| And he did
|7451| the evil
|5869| in the eyes of
|3068| Yahweh,
|3605| according to all
|0834| that
|6213| did
|0001| his forefathers.
How do you explain this?
Who was Jehoiachin?
Jehoiakim (609-598 11 years) 2 Kings 23:34-24:7 (Father of Jehoiachin)
Necco replaced Jehoahaz with his older half-brother, Eliakim, whose name he changed to Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim was evidently pro-Egyptians, and this may indicate why he was bypassed in favor of his younger brother by the people. Jehoiakim was forced to pay the equivalent of over $2 million tribute to Egypt (2 Kings 23:33). This was exacted by heavily taxing the people (2 Kings 23:35). The Syrian Empire of the Egyptians was short-lived, however, for 605 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar returned and inflicted a crushing defeat on the Egyptians at Charchemish.
Nebuchadnezzar also conquered all of Syria, Phoenicia and Palestine (called "Hatti-country") at this time. Jehoiakim was bound for deportation to Babylon (2 Chronicles 36:6). However, news of his father's death evidently caused a change of plans and Jehoiakim was left on the throne as a vassal to Babylon. Daniel and his three friends were taken captive at this time. After only three years, Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. In December 598, the Babylon armies were at Jerusalem, but while the siege was on, Jehoiakim died (perhaps murdered).
Jehoiachin (597-3 months) 2 Kings 24:8-16
He came to the throne upon the death of his father; but after a reign of only 3 months, Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians. The best of the people and their possessions were carried away at this time. Ezekiel was also deported at this time. Jehoiachin was always looked upon as the legitimate king (Ezekiel 1:2 In the fifth day of the month, which was the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's captivity).
Zedekiah (597-586 11 years) 2 Kings 24:17-25:7
Nebuchadnezzar replaced Jehoiachin with his uncle (another son of Josiah). In 588 B.C. Zedekiah openly rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. By January 588 B.C., Jerusalem was under siege (2 Kings 25:1). In July 586, the city fell. Zedekiah attempted to escape but was captured near Jericho and taken to Nebuchadnezzar's headquarters at Riblah. There, after seeing his sons slain (and they were evidently young as Zedekiah was only 32), he was blinded and deported to Babylon. The Babylonians utterly desolated the city, burning the homes and tearing down the walls (2 Kings 25:8-10).
Archaeological discoveries have also revealed that a man named Eliakim was steward of Jehoiachin's property while he was in Babylon. The fact that Jehoiachin was given a food allowance by the Babylonian king (2 Kings 25:37-30) is mentioned in Babylonian cuneiform records. This man is also named Coniah and Jeconiah (Jeremiah 22:24-30, especially verse 30).
Well first this would had to be written from from 597-500 bc. Archaeological evidence has also proven parts of the story to be true. That would mean this was written down 2500 years ago. The book of the Chronicles was written before the book of the Kings because there are numerous examples of Kings refering back to the book of Chronicles
(1 Kings 14:19,29 & 15:7,23,31 & 16:5,14,20,27 & 22:39,45)
(2 Kings 1:18 & 8:23 & 10:34 & 12:19 & 13:8,12 & 14:15,18,28 & 15:6 & etc ).
We also know that Chronicles is being more specific then Kings. Neither of the the original manuscripts no longer exists!
Jehoiakim was appointed king by Necho II, King of Egypt, upon the latter’s return from the battle in Haran, three months after he had killed Josiah at Megiddo (August/September 609 BCE) Necho’s action rendered null and void the rule of the younger brother Shalum/Jehoahaz, who was anointed king after the death of their father Josiah (2 Kgs 23:30). Nothing is known of events in Judah during the first four years of Jehoiakim’s rule. During these years the Egyptians firmly established their rule over Syria and Palestine, in preparation for the decisive struggle with the Babylonians over control of the Euphrates region. The proximity of the Kingdom of Judah to Egypt and the latter’s control of the entire region did not allow the tiny kingdom any leeway for either political or military maneuvering. One may assume that Jehoiakim had no choice, but to remain loyal to Egypt.
The great upheaval of 605 BCE had an impact on Judah. The armies of Nebuchadrezzar defeated the Egyptian legions at Carchemish and broke through into Syria. Egypt’s rule over other territories in Syria and Palestine was challenged. One must assume, however, that the actual subjugation of Judah to Babylon took place during the Babylonian campaign into Syria and Palestine (the ‘ïattu-Land’ in the Babylonian chronicles) in the second half of 604 BCE, after five years of Jehoiakim’s reign as an Egyptian vassal.
Nebuchadrezzar’s policy was to maintain the geopolitical arrangements that he found before him when he conquered the area. He allowed Jehoiakim to remain as king of Judah, even though King Necho II of Egypt had appointed him. This measure reflected the premise that a king who had accepted the Egyptian yoke was probably clever enough to accept the Babylonian yoke too. It is conceivable that the Babylonians hoped that these actions would preserve the stability of the region. Moreover, they could have anticipated that the kings whose rule they confirmed would feel gratitude towards the Babylonian king, and that such gratitude would lead to loyalty towards the new sovereign.
The rapid takeover of ïattu-Land by the Babylonians, and the Egyptian retreat from the region, left the small kingdoms along the coast and the interior regions with no room for maneuvering. One may assume that the first three years of Babylonian rule were quiet. Although there is no information about events in Judah during that time, it seems that Jehoiakim remained loyal to Nebuchadrezzar (“and Jehoiakim became his vassal for three years…;” see 2 Kgs 24:1). Only the failure of the Babylonian invasion into Egypt in the month of Kislev (November/ December 601 BCE), undermined the Babylonian control of the area. At that time, Necho II had an opportunity to renew his influence on the region. Against this background, one may understand the brief report about Jehoiakim’s rebellion against Nebuchadrezzar in 2 Kgs 24:1 (“Jehoiakim became his servant for three years; then he turned and rebelled against him”). It is hard to imagine that Jehoikaim’s revolt have taken place without the support of Egypt. Moreover, although we have no information about the historical circumstances of the period, it is clear that if Egypt did return to a position of influence in the region, then Jehoiakim, most likely, had no choice, but to offer his loyalty to his former master.
Only after three more years, in the month of Kislev (between mid-December 598 and mid-January 597 BCE) Nebuchadrezzar set out to re-establish his rule in the ïattu-Land. The conquest of ‘the city of Judah’ (i.e., Jerusalem) stood at the center of this Babylonian campaign. According to the Babylonian chronicle, Jerusalem surrendered to the Babylonians on the 2nd of Adar (March 16th/17th, 597 BCE). At that time, the three-month reign by Jehoiachin son of Jehoiakim came to an end. The young king went into exile, and Nebuchadrezzar appointed in Jerusalem a new king “of his own choice (lit. – heart),” namely, Zedekiah. Nebuchadrezzar also levied a heavy tax on the city and returned to Babylon.
The Babylonian chronicle shows that from the beginning of the Babylonian campaign, at some stage in the month of Kislev, until the city surrendered on the 2nd of Adar, three months at most had passed. In light of this information, one may assume that the Babylonian campaign was initially intended to suppress the revolt by Jehoiakim. If we accept the chronological delineation of the three months of Jehoiachin’s rule, then Jehoiakim was still alive when the Babylonians planned their campaign and he died close to its beginning, or immediately after the Babylonian force set out.
The Hebrew Bible does not offer any clear-cut information about the circumstances leading to the death of Jehoiakim. It is hard to ignore, however, the chronological juxtaposition of events. One must remember that since the king of Judah violated his vassal’s oath to Nebuchadrezzar, his death was one of the only resolutions that could have brought about the salvation of Jerusalem. Against this background, one may wonder whether Jehoiakim’s death was due to natural causes, and its timing—just as the Babylonian army set out on its Jerusalem campaign—was a mere coincidence, a testimony to historical fate. Or did those who understood that his death was the only way that would allow Jerusalem to be spared destruction murder the king? Or, alternatively, did Jehoiakim take his own life? There is no unequivocal answer to these questions but an analysis of the Biblical descriptions shows that there is no evidence supporting the latter alternatives. Jehoiakim’s death may have, and most likely, died of natural causes, as it will be shown below.
Jer. 22:13-17 contains a report of the prophet’s sermon of exhortation for the injustices practiced by Jehoiakim. Following this admonition, Jeremiah prophesizes about the retribution that is to befall the king. Verses 18-19, with supplementary text based on the LXX version, read: “Therefore thus Yahweh has said of Jehoiakim son of Josiah, king of Judah: [Woe to this man!] They shall not lament for him, “Alas, my brother, and alas, my sister!” They shall not [burn spices] for him, “Alas, lord, and alas [lady!] With the burial of an ass he shall be buried, dragged and dumped beyond the gates of Jerusalem”. Similar words were said of the king also in 36:30, namely, “therefore thus Yahweh has said concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah: He shall not have anyone sitting on the throne of David and his corpse shall be thrown out to the heat by day and to the frost by night”. At least the first part of the curse did not materialize, for Jehoiachin ascended the throne upon the death of his father. The lack of fulfillment of these words proves that they were uttered before the king’s death, and perhaps during the first five years of Jehoiakim’s rule, even before the subjugation to Babylon. They certainly do not reflect the events as they actually occurred. The prophet was not describing an actual reality that he personally witnessed, but was cursing the king and prophesying the punishment that is destined to befall him.
Jeremiah’s words and the language of his curses correspond to those in the dtr. law, namely those who do not heed the word of God “to obey to all of his commandments and statutes“ (Deut. 28:15) are cursed with “your dead body shall be food for all of the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth, and there shall be no one to frighten them away” (verse 26). Threats of this kind are quite common in dtr. historiography, in the prophetic literature, and in Psalms. There is, however, a close connection between the words of Jeremiah and the punishment as defined by the Deuteronomistic law. The curse against Jehoiakim also corresponds to well-known images in neo-Assyrian literature of the ultimate fate of rebels and treaty violators.
Son of Josiah
23 years old when he became king
Did evil
Imprisoned by king of Egypt
Reigned 3 months, died in Egypt
Jehoiakim
-- 2 Kings 23:36 - 24:7, 2 Chronicles 36:5-8
Son of Josiah, brother of Jehoahaz
25 years old when he became king
Also called "Eliakim"
Did evil
Babylon beseiged Jerusalem to take him
Reigned 11 years and died
Jehoiachin
-- 2 Kings 24:8-12, 2 Kings 25:27-30, 2 Chronicles 36:9-10
Son of Jehoiakim
18 years old when he became king
Did evil
Taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon
In 37th year of exile, released to eat at king's table
Reigned 3 months and 10 days
Zedekiah
-- 2 Kings 24:18 - 25:7, 2 Chronicles 36:11-14
Uncle of Jehoiachin
Also called "Mattaniah"
Did evil
Rebelled against Babylon after vowing allegiance
Captured by Babylon
Sons killed before his eyes
Blinded, bound, and brought to Babylon
Reigned 11 years, then Jerusalem fell to Babylon
http://www.albawabaforums.com/read.php3?f=5&i=279&t=247
II Chronicles 36 says that Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he became king.
II Kings 24:8 says Jehoiachin was 18 years old when he became king.
___________________________________
[There are several explanations of this. The one that makes the most sense to me is:
Jehoiachin was co-regent with his father for 10 years (from age 8), when his father died when Jehoiachin was 18, he was then sole regent for a short amount of time.
Also it can be noted that scribal errors when it comes to adding or dropping a 1 or a zero are very common in works of antiquity. Theologically, it should be evident to anyone that whether Jehoiachin was 8, 18, or if he ruled as a co-regent for 10 years, no Christian doctrine is remotely affected. If this is not satisfactory to CriticalMass, then I can go into more depth.
Works consulted:
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/jehoiachin.htm
http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/8or18.html
http:// ww.worthynews.com/apologetics/101-6-10.htm
http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020728.htm
THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:
2 Chronicles 36:9 says that Jehoiachin became king when he was eight years old, while 2 Kings 24:8 says he became king at the age of 18. Is there a contradiction?
RESPONSE:
Let us look at the passages in question:
2 Chronicles 36:9
Jehoiachin was eight years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months and ten days. And he did evil in the sight of the LORD.
2 Kings 24:8
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. His mother’s name was Nehushta the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
Indeed, the texts identify two different ages at which Jehoiachin became king, a difference of 10 years existing between them. A likely explanation for this supposed discrepancy is that he began to reign along side his father at the age of 8, and then took complete control of the throne at the age of 18, reigning from that point onward for approximately 3 months time.
The texts agree on the general length of his reign, 2 Chronicles being more specific that 2 Kings, as it mentions 3 months and 10 days. Of his reign, we are told "...he did evil in the sight of the LORD..." (2 Chronicles 36:9), and again, "...he did evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done." (2 Kings 24:9). It is very unlikely that these words are spoken of an 8 year old. However, as his father's apprentice for a 10 year period, no doubt he learned well the wickedness of his father, and repeated the same in his own short reign as king.
**************************************
THE CONFUSION OF HEBREW NUMBERS
Numbers in the Bible
Commentators agree that biblical numbers can easily be misread by translators, who then pass on incorrect figures. I can exemplify this by quoting from an article called "The Large Numbers of the Old Testament", by John Wenham1): "The Old Testament in various places records numbers which seem impossibly large. It has often been assumed that these figures were simply invented, and are evidence that the Bible is historically unreliable. But who would make up figures which are patently absurd? Would any man in his senses invent a story of a bus crash in which 16,000 passengers were killed? It is much more likely that these Old Testament numbers were faithfully copied out, despite the fact that they did not seem to make sense. Invention does not satisfactorily account for them. The explanation must lie elsewhere. And in fact patient research has gone a long way towards resolving this knotty problem."
The corruption of numbers
There is evidence that the Old Testament text is on the whole marvellously well preserved. There is also evidence from the parallel passages in Samuel, Kings and Chronicles and (especially) in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 that numbers were peculiarly difficult to transmit accurately. We have instances of extra noughts being added to a number:
"But they fled before Israel, and David killed '700 of their charioteers' and fourtythousand of their foot soldiers". [2.Samuel 10:18 NIV; As to `700', some Septuagint manuscripts; `charioteers' Hebrew `horsemen'. ]
But elsewhere we read:
"But they fled before Israel, and David killed `7000 of their charioteers' and 40,000 of their foot soldiers." [1.Chronicles 19:18]
"A digit can drop out: 2 Kings 24:8 gives the age of [King] Jehoiachin on accession as 18, whereas 2 Chronicles 36:92) gives it as 8. An entire numeral can drop out: 1 Samuel 13:1 says 'Saul was 30 years old'.3) In Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 the digits often vary by one unit. And there are other errors of copying, many of which are easily explained.
The confusion of words
In the modern Hebrew Bible all numbers are written out in full, but for a long time the text was written without vowels [which] made it possible to confuse two words which are crucial to this problem: 'eleph and 'alluph. Without vowel points these words look identical: 'lp. 'Eleph' is the ordinary word for 'thousand', but it can also be used in a variety of other senses: e.g. 'family' (Judges 6:15, Revised Version.) or 'clan' (Zechariah 9:7; 12:5,6, RSV) or perhaps a military unit. 'Alluph' is used for the 'chieftains' of Edom (Genesis 36:15-43); probably for a commander of a military 'thousand'; and almost certainly for the professional, fully-armed soldier. [Click Here]
Military statistics
At certain periods warfare was conducted by two sharply distinguished types of fighting men - the Goliaths and the Davids - the professional soldiers who were fully armed, and the folk army, whose only weapons were those of the peasant shepherd. It seems clear that in a number of places the word for professional soldier has been misunderstood as meaning 'thousand'. Take, for example, the attack on the little town of Gibeah in Judges 20. Verse 2 says that 400,000 foot-men 'that drew the sword' assembled. If these were in fact 400 fully-armed foot-soldiers, the subsequent narrative makes excellent sense.
[Comment: What Wenham is referring to here, by the way, is a civil war between the tribe of Benjamin and the rest of the tribes of Israel].
The Benjam[in]ite forces (verse 15) consist of 26 soldiers armed with swords, together with 700 men armed only with slings. At the first attack (verse 21) the Israelites lose 22 of their crack soldiers, the next day (verse 25) they lose a further 18; on the third day (verses 29,34) an ambush is set, consisting of, or led by, 10 of them. (Could 10,000 men take up their positions undetected?). The losses begin again (verse 31) 'as at other times' - and in this case the scale of loss has been clearly preserved, for about 30 Israelites (not apparently sword-armed soldiers), 25 Benjam[in]ite soldiers and 100 others are killed. Eighteen of them were killed in the first stage of the pursuit, 5 were later 'cut down in the highways' and 2 more at Gidom. The remaining 600 slingers took refuge in the rock of Rimmon".
"Similarly, in the assault [by Joshua] on Ai (Joshua 7-8) the true proportions of the narrative become clear when we realize that the disastrous loss of 36 men is matched by the setting of an ambush, not of 30,000 men of valour, but of 30.
David's feast in Hebron in 1 Chronicles 12 appears to be attended by enormous numbers, not of ordinary men, but of distinguished leaders - some 340,800 of them. In this case it looks as though in fact there were 'captains of thousands' and 'captains of hundreds', and that by metonomy or by abbrevation 'thousand' has been used for 'captains of thousands' and 'hundreds' for 'captains of hundreds'. 'Thousand' and 'hundred' have been treated as numerals and added together. When these figures are unscrambled, we get a total of roughly 2,000 'famous men', which seems eminently reasonable.
Along these lines most of the numerical problems of the later history fall into place.
In 1 Kings 20:27-30, the little Israelite army killed 100 (not 100,000) foot-soldiers, and the wall of Aphek [when it fell] killed 27 (not 27,000) more.
The Ethiopian invasion had a thousand, not a million, warriors (2 Chronicles 14: 9).
10 (not 10,000) were cast down from the top of the rock (2 Chronicles 25:12).
However there are some Precautions about Denying Hebrew Numbers
Several other examples may support Hebrew numbers as stated in the scriptures.
1. One example has to do with David fighting the Mesopotamien kings. Here, apparently, two independent sources verify each other as to the number of troops used in battle.
2. In 2.Samuel we learn that David took an unknown quantity of `shields of gold' from the Mesopotamien kings. In 2.Chronicles we learn that Pharaoh Thutmoses III. took 300 `shields of gold' plus `200 targets of gold' from Jerusalem. The 300 `shields' are represented at Karnak.
3. Gideon's call for arms against their enemy brought initially at least over 30,000 personal together. (Judges 7)
4. The size of the Assyrian army approximates the number of troops stated in 2.Kings.
5. Later, Persian armies were also of great size in their conquest of the west. In biblical times, Kings were absolute rulers, they could muster the entire nation to participate in wars as Xerxes did when he `emptied the whole of Asia' to fight against Greece.
These facts we also should keep in mind when considering the number problems. While it is possible that some numbering inconsistencies crept into biblical accounts, we probably should not flatly declare all figures found in the Bible as unreliable.
The size of the Israelite nation
The most interesting, most difficult and (from the historian's point of view) the most important question is the size of the Israelite population at the different stages of its history. The present texts indicate that the 70 souls of Joseph's day had risen to two or three million at the time of the Exodus (Numbers 1) and to at least five million in the time of David (2 Samuel 24:9; 1 Chronicles 21:5). With regard to the latter, R. de Vaux rightly says: '(2 Samuel) lists 800,000 men liable for military service in Israel, and 500,000 in Judah ... The lower total, in 2 Samuel, is still far too high: 1,300,000 men of military age would imply at least five million inhabitants, which, for Palestine, would mean nearly twice as many people to the square mile as in the most thickly populated countries of modern Europe'.4) The solution to the problem of the Exodus numbers is a long story. Suffice it to say that there is good reason to believe that the original censuses in Numbers 1 and 26 set out the numbers of each tribe, somewhat in this form:
Simeon: 57 armed men; 23 'hundreds' (military units).
This came to be written: 57 'lp; 2'lp 3 'hundreds'.
Not realising that 'lp in one case meant 'armed man' and in the other 'thousand', this was tidied up to read 59,300. When these figures are carefully decoded, a remarkably clear picture of the whole military organization emerges. The total fighting force [of the Exodus Israelites] is some 18,000 which would probably mean a figure of about 72,000 for the whole migration".
With this important explanation by Wenham, we can now begin to query whether the number of Israelite men on the march during the Exodus, given as "about 600,000" (Exodus 12:37) - making an overall total of some 2-3 million people - may be a gross over-estimate. I am not saying that the inspired writer got it wrong; but only that a copyist's mistake with numbers may have crept in. It had previously occurred to me in fact that so many fighting men as 600,000 would unlikely have been scared of Egypt's royal force of 600 chariots; especially considering that in Exodus 13:18 we read: "The sons of Israel went out from Egypt fully armed". Though perhaps this last description may apply only to Israel's shock troops; for according to Yahuda, in both Exodus 13:18 & 14:8 (op. cit., 96-97): "... it is emphasized ... that the Hebrews in leaving Egypt went out proudly and triumphantly having troops armed with lances, a well disciplined host. That in Egypt there were troops armed with lances is shown on various Egyptian bas-reliefs ..., and such troops would have formed the advance section at the head of the army". (Emphasis added).5)
We read in II Chronicles about Zerah's invasion of southern Judæa: "Zerah the Ethiopian [Cushite] and an army of one million strong with three hundred chariots made an incursion, and penetrated to Maresha. [King] Asa [of Judah] marched out to intercept him and drew up his battle line in the Valley of Zephathah, at Maresha. He called on Yahweh, his God. 'Yahweh', he said, 'no one but you can stand up for the powerless against the powerful. Come to our help, Yahweh our God! We rely on you, and confront this horde in your name. Yahweh, you are our God. Let man leave everything to you!' Yahweh defeated the Ethiopians before Asa and the Judaeans, the Ethiopians fled, and Asa pursued them with his army as far as Gerar. So many of the Ethiopians fell that recovery was impossible, for they had been shattered before Yahweh and his army" (2.Chronicles 14:8-13).
Two chapters further on, we read that Zerah's Ethiopian army was also composed of Libyans (16:8).
Thanks to Wenham, we can now estimate that this foreign army was more likely 1,000 strong, rather than a most unlikely 1 million. The latter figure is made even more implausible considering that the main Egyptian army apparently did not take part, but only foreign mercenaries, Ethiopians & Libyans, from within the empire. A few years after Solomon's death (c.920 BC), the divided kingdom in Palestine was absorbed into the Egyptian empire by the mighty Pharaoh Thutmose III, and it generally remained so (though apparently the pious king Asa managed to shake off the Egyptian overlordship) until the Assyrians took control of that region in the C8th. That Egypt, during her supremacy, was wont to send into Palestine highly efficient squadrons, at the behest of beleaguered vassal kings (who, in turn, were under Egyptian governors), is attested by the el-Amarna [EA] letters of Pharaoh Akhnaton and his father (a few decades after Asa's time, according to Velikovsky). These government troops were most valued as support by the Syro-Palestinian vassal kings during their interminable conflicts.
Damien Mackey
References and Notes
1) John Wenham, `The Large Numbers of the Old Testament', Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967): 19-23.
2) One Hebrew manuscript, some Septuagint manuscripts and Syriac; most Hebrew manuscripts use `8'.
3) A few late manuscripts of the Septuagint; Hebrew does not have `thirty'. KJV does not mention 30 years, NIV does mention 30 years.
4) Figuring population density naturally depends on how many square miles the writer credits Israel to have inhabited at the time. We show in our paper on Jeroboam that the Israel of the time of Solomon may have been quite a bit larger than most historians seem to visualize it.
5) As to the size of the Israelite nation, the figure of 600,000 is not impossible considering that it was not so much the lances of the Egyptians they feared but rather the arrows of their bowmen against which they had little defense. Egyptian bowmen were always the most feared military units of the ancient literature. The estimate of the number of Israelites also should take into account the vast construction projects they took part in during their years of slavery down to the last day of servitude.
http://www.specialtyinterests.net/hebrew_numbers.html
*************************
Other sources used:
http://www.bembry.org/bible/ot/king_chart.php
http://www.worthynews.com/apologetics/101-6-10.htm
Other verses worth noting:
2 Kings 24:5-6
5. Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah?
6. So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead.
2 Kings 24:12
12. And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him(Jehoiachin) in the eighth year of his(?????) reign.