who is behind the information of the Factbook?

Kristin · 2025-06-12T14:48:43+00:00

There was an error rendering this rich post.

I feel kind of nervous to post this, since I think I am missing something super obvious, but I have a question about the Factbook.

When I hover over most names in Logos, a little bubble pops up with a scribble about the person. I had been looking at Ahab, and I noticed it said he was the 7th king, which caught my attention since I am pretty sure he is the 8th king. So I clicked on it and it opened the Factbook.

Now in bold letters I see Ahab with this same claim, but who is saying this? Below that is Anchor, but that appears to be a different entry, I think.

So all this said, who is actually making the claims in the information of the Factbook when I hover over a name?

Bildschirmfoto 2025-06-12 um 09.32.23.png

Find more posts tagged with

Factbook

Accepted answers

Andrew Batishko

If I am understanding correctly, the Factbook is basically a Faithlife commentary, but the individuals actually behind the data is not clarified to the users. Is this correct?

The short descriptions for entries in Factbook are curated by Faithlife's data team. They may written in house or pulled in from various public sources. For people, they may come from the Biblical People Dataset (as Justin indicated), but they may also come from other datasets as well. It's complicated because Factbook pulls together information from many datasets, often merging together multiple entries.

If you do spot something that seems wrong, you can definitely report it on the forum as a bug, and it will get passed on to the data team for them to take a look.

All comments

Andrew Batishko

That data is curated by Faithlife. That said, most of the dictionaries and encyclopedias I looked at indicated that Ahab is the seventh king. A couple indicated he was the eighth. I don't know where the discrepancy comes from.

Kristin

Hi @Andrew Batishko, thank you for clarifying this. If I am understanding correctly, the Factbook is basically a Faithlife commentary, but the individuals actually behind the data is not clarified to the users. Is this correct?

Regarding the discrepancy, I agree it is odd that dictionaries can't agree. I assume the issue is that the people who say 7th are ignoring Zimri, since he only reigned for a week. (He did nonetheless reign though).

Given this, just out of curiosity I looked up both Zimri and Tibni to see what numbers the Factbook gives them, but they are just kings generally without numbers.

Justin Gatlin

The 7/8 issue is whether or not we should count Tibni. I wouldn't. He was a rival claimant to the throne with Omri but he failed and Omri was the one who actually became king.

The Factbook entries are just a gloss, but you can read about them in the Biblical People Dataset Documentation in your library.

Kristin

Hi @Justin Gatlin,

Thanks for clarifying this, and that makes sense. I can see how Tibni could be a gray area. Tbh, I have always counted him since my professor did, but looking at it now I think I still would, given that half of the people considered him to be king for four years, and the text clarifies Omni only became king after Tibni died. Thanks again for clarifying this as I can see how the numbering could be read either way.

Andrew Batishko

If I am understanding correctly, the Factbook is basically a Faithlife commentary, but the individuals actually behind the data is not clarified to the users. Is this correct?

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1371849#Comment_1371849

The distinction is assisted in whether the LXX text is older than the MT in v22 (and ignoring the naming problem).

Kristin

Hi @DMB, the LXX and MT both seem to be generally saying the same thing (with the LXX just more explicit), but thanks for letting me know.

Justin Gatlin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1371849#Comment_1371849

It could certainly go either way. I went back to my book, Journey Through the Old Testament, to make sure I hadn't changed my mind and forgotten! But I stand by the idea that, on close inspection, the text says people followed Zimri with the intention of making him king, and others followed Omri to make him king, but only Omri is actually described as being king in the MT. Of course, as DMB pointed out, the LXX says that Omri reigned after Tibni, which is a little weird, since they both held about equal power. If you give priority to the Hebrew text, there is no plausible way to read that Zimri reigned first and then Omri.

All Israel made Omri king when they found about Zimri's conspiracy and Zimri then committed suicide (1 Kings 16:16). This coheres with the chronology: Omri's reign was twelve years (16:23). Zimri's reign was during the 27th year of Asa (16:15) and ended in the 38th year of Asa (16:29), so to get twelve years, the text is crediting him as king the entire time. Then, in 16:21, there was an insurrection led by Tibni. But Omri had already been proclaimed as king. So when 16:23 says he became king in the 31st year of Asa, it must mean that there was a struggle for 3-4 years, and then he was the undisputed ruler for the rest of his life. Omri possessed undisputed reign before and after Tibni's rebellion, Tibni never ruled the whole nation, Omri reigned in the capital (Tirzah) the whole time, and the text never says Tibni was king. I wouldn't say that Harald Hardrada was king of England, either. :)

NichtnurBibelleser

@Kristin I had a similar question some time ago. If you like, you can check it here.

Michelle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1371866#Comment_1371866

TIL Thank you!