hibit the relation of the human monarch to the King JEHOVAH. When the kingdom is promised and at last committed to David, the whole transaction again exhibits the same relation, and in all the history of David, the continual aim of the author is to show that during the whole course of his government, that monarch had constant regard to the King JEHOVAH, and in this respect furnished an example for the imitation of his successors. Accordingly, he praises or censures every king, in proportion as he imitated, or disregarded, the example of his predecessor David. Even in the kingdom of Israel he follows the same plan, comparing the kings respectively with the first of that monarchy, Jeroboam, whose bad example they imitated, and even surpassed.He refers every thing to the law of Moses, not indeed as often as is done in the book of Joshua, but oftener than in the book of Judges.[b]He everywhere observes the same method of succinct narration, especially with respect to the wars, which he mentions cursorily, while, on the contrary, his account of those things which related to the theocracy, is everywhere more diffuse.The conclusion of the second book of Kings manifests, by its brevity, an author hastening to the end of a long labour.-Lastly, fragments occur in II Ki. iv. 1—viii. 15, just as they do in II Sam. xxi-xxiv; so that the author's identity is everywhere evident.[c]-2) The diversity of style and language is not so great as might be expected from a plurality of authors. That which is observable, arises from the records written by different persons, and almost verbally compiled by our author. The only difference between the books of Samuel and Kings is, that in the latter, books are cited, in which the reader may seek for further information, but in the former no such references occur. But if we observe that the books of Samuel generally draw more largely from foreign sources, the reason is plain, why the author thought it unnecessary to refer to other books. This defect, if it be a defect, is supplied by the author of Chronicles; I Chron. xxix. 29.[d]

(a) EUSEB. Ecc. Hist. IV. xxvi. VI. xxv. HIERONYM. Prolog. Galeat. JOSEPH. cont. Ap. Lib. I. c. viii. The division into two books has been generally introduced into the Hebrew Bibles since the editions of BOMBERG, in the commencement of the sixteenth century. Tr.]

[b) This assertion is scarcely capable of proof. In the books of Samuel not one reference is made by the historian to the law of Moses. In the books of Kings only the following occur: II Ki. x. 31. xiv. 6. xvii. 7-19, 35-40. xviii. 6, 12. xxiii. 3, 25.- -The difference between the books of Samuel and those of Kings in this respect, is used by De Wette and others as an argument in proof of a different origin. Tr.]

[c) The uninterrupted continuation of the history through the books of Samuel and Kings has been adduced in proof of the unity of the work. De Wette objects that if the history be uninterrupted, the narration is not, since the appendices, II Sam. xxi-xxiv., seem to show that the work to which they are affixed is complete. Tr.]

[d) DE WETTE (Einleit. § 186.) maintains that the separate origin of the Books of Kings is proved by the following particulars in which they differ from the Books of Samuel: 1) the existence of proofs of an origin during the captivity throughout the work; 2) the frequent reference to the Pentateuch; 3) the disapprobation of the liberty of religious worship; 4) the difference of style; 5) the citation of authorities; and 6) the minuteness of the chronology. He, however, gives no proof of his assertion. Tr.]

§ 47. Age of the Books of Samuel and Kings.

If these four books are the production of one author, they could not have been commenced before the destruction of Jerusalem, which is briefly related in the conclusion; nor could they have been published before the liberation of king Jehoiachin from prison, mentioned II Ki. xxv. 27-30, (which happened in the 26th year after that event,*) nor long after it, since the death of Jehoiachin, who could not have lived long after, since he was then an old man, is not recorded. In confirmation of this opinion respecting the date of these books, it may be observed, that the author, by his description of the temple, brief as it is, shows that he had seen it before the destruction of Jerusalem; he could not therefore have lived later than the date assigned. Who he was, we have no means of ascertaining. The passage, I Chron. xxix. 29., which mentions that Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, wrote the history of David[a], relates to annals of the king

* [So Jahn in his Latin work. In the German it is 'the 19th' which is evidently erroneous. Prideaux places Jehoiachin's liberation in the 28th year after the destruction of Jerusalem. Tr.]

dom contemporary with the events related, from which works these books were compiled.[b] Nor can any thing be brought to show that Jeremiah or Ezra was the author.[c]

[a) For an account and attempt at defence of the common opinion which refers this passage to the books of Samuel, see HORNE, Introd. IV. p. 40. s. Tr.]

[b) So also other references which occur in Chronicles do not relate to our books of Kings. See II Chron. ix. 29. xii. 15. xiii. 22. Tr.]

[c) For a statement of the argument in favour of Ezra's being the compiler of the books of Kings, see HORNE, Introd. IV. 47. s. The majority of the Jews assert them to be the work of Jeremiah. Carpzov, Introd. p. 243. The difference of style, and the superficial notice of his times, are in contradiction to this opinion. Comp. also II Ki. xxiv. 1, 6, with Jer. xxii. 19. Tr.]

In the books of Chronicles or annals (0′p'n '77) the following

T

particulars are contained. 1) I Chron. i-ix. consists of a series of genealogies, the more ancient of which are so obscure as to be hardly intelligible unless collated with the Pentateuch; the more modern are the most perspicuous. Agreeably to ancient usage in genealogies, historical facts worthy of observation are interspersed throughout the whole.[a] 2) I Chron. x. 1–II Chron. ix. 31, contains accounts relating to David and Solomon, which in part are the same as those contained in the books of Samuel and the first chapters of the first book of Kings, although there are many additions, particularly on subjects relating to the worship of God.[b] 3) II Chron. Xxxxvi. affords a succinct history of the kingdom of Judah, and many matters, especially with respect to the various reformations and to divine worship, which are not in the books of Kings. [c] The kingdom of Israel is not mentioned, except when it becomes connected with the history of that of Judah.

[a) These genealogical tables are exceedingly brief. Nothing is to be found of the tribe of Dan.

I Chron. vii. 6-12. and viii.

That of Benjamin is twice introduced,
The genealogies of the priests and Le-

vites are given most in detail, and terminate with the destruction of Jerusalem, I Chron. v. 27-40. vi. 1—32. (vi. 1—47.) They are very far from being complete. Even those of the high priests, extending through 1000 years, comprehend only twenty-two successions where thirty might be expected, I Chron. v. 27-40. vi. 1-14. Those of the tribe of Judah are pretty copious, I Chron. ii. iv. 1-23., and the register of David's descendants runs down to the end of the fourth century before Christ; I Chron. iii. All these tables relate to distinguished families and individuals. They contain occasionally most important historical notices, which prove that in the original tables historical matters were here and there introduced. See I Chron. iv. 18, 22, 23, 38-43. v. 10-26. vii. 20-24.]

[b) The death only of Saul is mentioned, I Chron. x. David's seven years' government of Judah, of which we read in II Sam. i-iv. is entirely omitted, and the submission of the eleven tribes, and the capture of the citadel of Jerusalem, with some additional matter, immediately introduced, I Chron. xi. Then follow accounts of men who had joined David during Saul's persecution, and who afterwards went to aid him at Hebron, c. xii.; also, accounts of the attempt to take the ark to Zion, c. xiii.; of David's friendship with Hiram, king of Tyre; of two successful attacks upon the Philistines, c. xiv.; and of the bringing the ark into the citadel of Zion, c. xv. xvi. The promise which was made to David in consequence of his intention to build a temple, and the narrative of his victories over various peoples, and of the war of vengeance which he undertook against the Ammonites, are related almost in the same words with the parallel accounts in Samuel: comp. c. xvii. xviii. xix. xx. 1-3. with II Sam. vii. viii. x. xii. 26—32.—These are followed by certain occurrences which took place during different wars, and by the numbering of the army, c. xxi. Then come additional circumstances of David's life, namely, his commission to Solomon to build the temple, c. xxii; his division of the Levites and priests, c, xxiii-xxv., with some of their services, c. xxvi; also the distribution of the Israelites in reference to military service, c. xxvii; the public recognition of Solomon as his successor, accompanied by a renewed command to build a temple, and an account of the presents offered by himself and the most distinguished Hebrews, c. xxviii. xxix. In II Chron. i-ix., the history of Solomon is almost throughout in unison with that in I Ki. iii-xi.]

[c) Thus the reformation under Jehoshaphat, II Chron. xvii—xx., that under Hezekiah, c. xxix-xxxii., that under Manasseh, c. xxxiii., and that under Josiah, c. xxxiv. xxxv., are described with more particularity than in the parallel places in Kings. See I Ki. xxii. 41—46, II Ki. xviii-xx, xxi. 1-18. xxii. 1-xxiii. 30.1

§ 49. Design of the Books of Chronicles.

From the preceding sketch of the contents of these books, it is evident that the author has written an epitome of the history of the Hebrews down to the end of the captivity, yet with the determination not to touch on the history of the kingdom of Israel, unless where that of the kingdom of Judah required it. He supplies many things which had been omitted in the books of Samuel and Kings, and omits others which had been mentioned in those books. Whether he had read them or not is uncertain. [a] The choice of subjects to be related shows that his intention was to point out to the Hebrews when returning to their country their real ancestry, with the possessions and residences of their families, and to instruct them in the manner in which divine worship should be restored.* Hence in the genealogies he continually mentions the situation and residence of each family, I Chron. ii. 23, 53. iv. 3, 12, 14, 17, 18. ss., 28-33. v. 8, 11—17. vi. 39—66. vii. 28. s. ix. 1-45; hence also he gives the genealogy of the Levites and priests at greater length; and hence, lastly, he narrates with the more particularity, not only the order of divine worship as established by David and Solomon, but also the reformations which followed at different periods.

[a) LE CLERC thinks it probable that he had not: Diss. de Script. Libror. Historicor. But see note a) to i 51. Tr.]

§ 50. Age of the Books of Chronicles.

It appears from the design of the writer, that these books were written not long after the time of the captivity. With this date agree the several peculiarities which may be observed in them, such as the Chaldean orthography; the frequency of the letters called matres lectionis[a]; the introduction of recent words and objects, especially those of Persian origin, for instance, pra, cotton, 3, a

* This design, which is obvious to every attentive reader, was not observed by De Wette, and hence he charges the author with the flagrant crime of imposture, as though, being himself a Levite or a priest, he had invented those matters which relate to divine worship, to the Levites, and to the priests. But that he candidly recounts facts, and does not add from his own invention, will appear hereafter.