was over the household: and Adoniram the son of Abda was over the tribute."

It has been said there is no resting-place between 2 Samuel and I Kings, and therefore both books proceeded from the same author. But there is a resting-place in the narrative; for 2 Sam. xxi.—xxiv. has all the characteristics of an appendix, [which was subsequently added to connect that to the following book.]"

However, the essential difference between the two books appears plain, 1. from the traces of the Babylonish period, from beginning to end; 2. from the acquaintance with the Pentateuch; 3. from the disapproval of freedom of worship; 4. from the different spirit of the history; 5. from a reference to the sources of the author; and, 6. from the accuracy of the dates.

[The Talmud makes Jeremiah the author; but this opinion is contradicted, amongst other arguments, by the fact that the history of his own time is treated of but superficially, and by the following passage:

2 Kings xxv. 27–30. "And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the

" See Eichhorn, § 484. Jahn (p. 232) defends the opinion that there is but one author. The remark of Stähelin (in Tholuck, Theol. Anz., 1838, p. 526) is still more important, viz., that there is a close philological affinity between 1 Kings i. ii. and the books of Samuel, and that originally they were united. Crethites and Plethites occur in 1 Kings i. 38, and nowhere else except in 2 Samuel. occurs in the books of Kings only once, 1 Kings i. 12; but in Samuel, 1 Sam. xix. 11, 2 Sam. xix. 6. Likewise, 77, only in 1 Kings i. 29, but in 2 Sam. iv. 9;, only 1 Kings i. ii. but see 1 Sam. xiii. 13, 2 Sam. v. 12; 7, in the books of Kings only, 1 Kings i. 9, 19, 25; but 2 Sam. vi. 13; ark of the Lord Jehovah, 1 Kings ii. 26, as in the books of Samuel. To follow this hint, we must distinguish between two redactions, or suppose the author of Samuel left something unused in his authorities, which was taken by the author of the books of Kings.

¿ [See above, vol. i. p. 30, sqq.]

twelfth month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon in the year that he began to reign did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of prison; and he spake kindly to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon; and changed his prison garments: and he did eat bread continually before him all the days of his life. And his allowance was a continual allowance given him of the king, a daily rate for every day, all the days of his life."]

b

Hävernik and Movers make use of the affinity between the books of Kings, and, in some places, of Jeremiah's writings; for example, between 1 Kings ix. 8, 9, and Jer. xxii. 8; 2 Kings xvii. 13, 14, and Jer. vii. 13, 24 ; 2 Kings xxi. 12, and Jer. xix. 3; and the identity of Jer. lii. with 2 Kings xxiv. 18, xxv., to support their different opinions-one, that Jeremiah wrote the books of Kings; the other, that he wrote an older book of Kings, the source of the present books, and that these latter, and the prophecies of Jeremiah, were collected by the same compiler, who also wrote Jer. lii. But this affinity can be explained in another manner, either on the supposition that Jeremiah was used by the author of Kings, or that Jeremiah made use of a more ancient author, who wrote some passages now in the books of Kings. In 2 Kings xxv. 27-30, especially, there is evidence against the opinion that the books were composed by Jeremiah.

a

Hävernik, 1. c. p. 171. Movers, De utriusque Vatic. Jer. Indole, &c., p. 47. Hävernik, Comm. z. Daniel, p. 14.

The other passages cited by Movers prove nothing.

CHAPTER VI.

BOOKS OF THE CHRONICLES."

§ 187

NAME, DIVISION, AND CONTENTS, OF THE BOOKS OF
THE CHRONICLES.

THESE make but one book in the Hebrew canon, and are but one, if we regard their internal character. In the Hebrew, they have this title, Words of THE DAYS, or ANNALS. In the Alexandrine version, they form two books, with the title Ilagaλeinóueva, that is, SUPPLEMENTS, or THINGS WHICH ARE LEFT. Following Jerome,' we call them the Books of Chronicles.

I. They contain a register of families, and other lists, (1 Ch. i.—ix.) In this the list of families in the tribe of Benjamin appears twice, (vii. 6-12, and viii. 1-40,) and in part a third time, (ix. 35-40.) But the tribes of Dan and Zebulon do not appear at all. These accounts are drawn in part from the older historical books, and in part from other sources unknown to us. Single historical notices are interwoven with them, and there are chasms and inaccuracies."

Serrarii, Sancti, Vict. Strigelii, Jo. Clerici, Lightfootii, Maur. Commentt. Lud. Lavateri Comm. in Paralip.; Heidelb. 1599, sq.

J. H. Michaelis, Annotatt. in Paralip., in Uber. Annotatt. in Hagiogr. ed. J. H. Michaelis ; Hal. 1719, 1720; 3 vols. 4to. Geddes, 1. c.

As cited above, vol. i. p. 111, sq.

A Table of Passages parallel with 1 Ch. i.—ix.

1 Ch. i. 1-4, compiled. .

i. 5-23.

i. 24-27, compiled.

Gen. v.

x. 2-29.

xi. 10, sqq.

On account of the alterations and additions in the parallels to chap. ii., Keil and Hävernik" maintain that the Chronicler did not use the historical books of the Old Testament as authorities, but resorted to some other family registers. Bertholdt has a similar theory,' and the numerous variants favor this opinion. But these very alterations and additions show that the Chronicler, or his authority, referred to, and made use of, these his

1 Ch. i. 29-31..

a

i. 32, 33...

i. 35-54, compiled.

ii. 3, 4, compiled.

ii. 5...

ii. 10-12.

ii. 13-17, enlarged.

iii. 1-9, enlarged and different.

iii. 10-16..

iv. 24....

iv. 28-31. . .

Gen. xxv. 13–15.

xxv. 2-4.

xxxvi. 10-43.

Xxxviii. 3-30.

xlvi. 12.

Ruth iv. 19.

1 Sam. xvi. 6, sqq.

2 Sam. iii. 3-6, v. 14.

Books of Kings.

Num. xxvi. 12.

Josh. xix. 2-5.

v. 1-10, enlarged and differ- 5 Gen. xlvi. 9, Num. xxvi. 5, Josh. xiii.

16, 17.

Gen. xlvi. 11, Ex. vi. 18, 23, xxviii. 1.

Ezra vii. 1-5.

Ex. vi. 16-29, 23, 24.

Josh. xxi. 10-39.

Gen. xlvi. 13, Num. xxvi. 23.

{Gen. xlvi. 21, Num. xxvi. 38—40,

....

{

viii. 29-40, and ix. 35-44,

different, with vari

ous readings.

1 Ch. viii. 1, sqq.

Gen. xlvi. 24.

Num. xxvi. 29, xxvii. 1.

Num. xxvi. 34-38.

Gen. xlvi. 17, Num. xxvi. 44-47.

S Gen. xlvi. 21, Num. xxvi. 38-40, 1 Ch. vii. 6, sq.

1 Sam. ix. 1, xiv. 49–51.

ix. 2-34, enlarged and different. Neh. xi. 3-24.

Keil, Versuch über d. Bucher d. Chronikeln; 1833, p. 163, sqq. Havernik, l. c. vol. ii. pt. i. p. 182. Movers, Ub. d. Ch.; 1834, p. 65, sqq.

P. 965, sqq.

torical books. Thus, for example, the remark upon Er, in ii. 3, that "he was wicked in the sight of Jehovah, and he slew him," is taken, word for word, from Gen. xxxviii. 7. The statement about Achar, (Achan) ii. 7, "the troubler of Israel ...... who sinned in the accursed thing," refers to Josh. vii. In ii. 6, there is a false combination from 1 Kings v. 11, (iv. 31, in the English Bible,) for Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara, are enumerated among the sons of Zerah. In iii. 1-6, the sons of David are divided into two classes-such as were born at Hebron, and such as were born at Jerusalem. This division refers to 2 Sam. iii. 2-5, and v. 14-16. Again: the genealogy of the kings (iii. 11— 15) is borrowed from the books of Kings, as it appears from the use of the more ancient form of the name, terminating in, which occurs nowhere else but in vi. 24. In vi. 7, (vi. 22, English Bible,) among the sons of Kohath are Amminadab, Korah, Assir, Elkanah, and Ebiasaph, which are incorrectly borrowed from Ex. vi. 23, 24. Keil himself, however, admits that in vi. 39— 66, the same original document-though disfigured— lies at the bottom of both this passage and its parallels. There is a remarkable parallelism between ix. 2-34, and Neh. xi. 3—24.“

Keil entirely denies this, though Movers admits a common source. Keil thinks this catalogue in the Chronicles of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, was written before the exile. But Dahler, (De Lib. Paralip. Auctoritate; 1819,) Movers, and others, think both this and that in Nehemiah were written after the exile. But the latter opinion is incorrect, for "the first inhabitants, in their possessions and their cities," mentioned in 1 Ch. ix. 2, are not "those who dwelt in it before Jerusalem was peopled with the inhabitants of the adjoining country," (Neh. xi. 1,) for these latter are not the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but contrasted with them, as it is clear from verse 3 —“ And at Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah," &c. The earlier inhabitants are obviously contrasted with those who had been brought in from the country.