the same attempt, making more or less use of the sources available to them in their
attempts.
Such attempts at creating a world chronology largely came to an end by the conclusion of
the nineteenth century, due to a number of factors. One of these factors was the rise of a
geological science in the nineteenth century that held that the testimony of the geological
data was that the earth was incalculably old, certainly far older than even the longest of
the ancient chronologies that had been written in the ancient Near East. Added to this was
the rise of Darwinian evolution as the explanation for the origin and development of the
variety of species that inhabit the earth. Darwinian evolution depended for its force on the
long ages of geological development that geological science had posited as an
explanation of the data gleaned from the structures of the earth. The third major factor in
the rejection of the idea of developing a world chronology was the development of the
historical-critical method in Biblical studies. These critics largely held that, while
Ussher's analysis of the Biblical data might be right, it was based on a flawed
hermeneutic. Ussher, in their view, failed to recognize that the Biblical data regarding
chronology (and that of the classical period as well) had arisen in the midst of an
essentially mythological mindset that could no longer be sustained under the pressure of a
scientific approach to the study of these ancient texts.
Hence, in the last century or so, while the study of classical and Biblical chronology has
continued (mostly as a matter of historical interest), the attempt to take the Biblical
chronology back before the time of Abraham has been largely abandoned. This is the
case not only among those scholars who do not hold to a view of Biblical infallibility and
inerrancy but among evangelical scholars as well. Thus, when Gleason Archer produced
his chronology for the Expositor's Bible Commentary he omitted any attempt to show a
chronology before Abraham.
world) for the various patriarchs, but does not give a Gregorian date for them.
Two of the earliest Christian chronologists were Julius Africanus (AD 170-240) and
Eusebius (AD 263-339). These were not the only early Christian chronologists, and were
perhaps not even the earliest, but they are the earliest whose work remains available to
the modern reader. For Julius Africanus fragments of the five books of his chronography
remain, and are readily available to the modern reader in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (vol.
VI: 130-39). He gives a total of 5,500 years from the creation to the advent of Christ. In
his discussion of the patriarchs up to the time of Abraham, he generally follows the