THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES
The International Critical Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY
ON
THE BOOKS OF CHEONICLES
EY
EDWARD LEWIS CURTIS, Ph.D., D.D.
PROFESSOR OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE IN THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL OF YALE UNIVERSITY
AND
ALBERT ALONZO MADSEN, Ph.D.
PASTOR OF THE FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH AT
NEWBURGH, N. Y.
EDINBURGH
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET
PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN B?
MORRISON AND GIBB LIMITED
FOK
T. 4 T. CLARK, EDINBURGH
NEW yOEK. CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
First Printed .... 1910
Second Impression . . . 1952
TO
BENJAMIN WISNER BACON
FRANK CHAMBERLAIN PORTER
AND
WILLISTON WALKER
OF THE
FACULTY OF THE YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL
THIS WORK IS DEDICATED IN
RECOGNITION OF AFFECTIONATE COMRADESHIP
DURING MANY YEARS
PREFACE
THIS Commentary has been prepared not less for the readers
of the Revised Version of the English Bible than for those
of the Hebrew Text. Hebrew words, it is true, appear at
times in the main comment. They have been frequently intro-
duced to illustrate the origin of different readings arising through
a similarity of letters; then their force is clear without a knowledge
of the language. They also appear in connection with certain
genealogies, notably those of i Ch. VH, VHI, where without
their introduction critical comment would be impossible. Else-
where in ignoring them the reader unacquainted with Hebrew will
find the comment clear though less ample.
The Books of Chronicles are secondary; they are of interest
mainly through the new view which they give of Israel's history
compared with the earlier narratives. This fact has been con-
stantly kept in mind in the preparation of this Commentary.
Certain readers will doubtless feel that conclusions in details should
have been given with more dogmatism and that the word "prob-
ably" should less often occur. But about many matters of detail
I am far from certain, although I have no doubt of the general
historical, or rather unhistorical, character of Chronicles. I have
aimed also to make the work comprehensive in giving the opinions
of others.
In regard to the literary structure of i and 2 Chronicles I cannot
follow the view of those who regard the author throughout as a
mere copyist, nor yet of those who hold that apart from his Old
Testament quotations he composed freely with no recourse for
information to other written sources. I have given the view of a
free composition but allowed a recourse to non-canonical written
sources. I have given marks of unity of style in portions alleged
by some to come from other writers, although I am fully aware
b vii
Viii PREFACE
that if the Chronicler were a copyist these marks of unity might
be due to his main source. I have little sympathy with that sub-
jective criticism which prescribes beforehand an author's scheme
of composition and then regards all contrary to this scheme as
interpolations or supplements. Inconsistencies or redundancies
are not proofs of a lack of unity of authorship, especially in the
work of the Chronicler.
Agreeably to the other volumes of this series, Yahweh appears
regularly as the name of Israel's deity. But this transliteration of
Yodh ("») by y and Waw (1) by w has not been applied in other
proper names, since in a commentary on books containing so
many proper names as i and 2 Chronicles, designed to be used
in connection with the Revised English Version, it seemed best to
retain the spelling of the proper names given in that version.
Medial Aleph (H) and initial, medial, and final 'Ayin (y) in italicised
names on their first appearance, but not necessarily on their
immediate repetition or in juxtaposition with the Hebrew letters,
have been represented by the smooth and rough breathings (").
The hard letters Heth (n), Teth (13), Sadhe C^), and Koph (p)
have been represented by h, t, z, and k. (The introduction of s
instead of z would have been too violent a change.) But none of
these marks have been introduced, except incidentally, in the
Roman type, and in some familiar names like that of Israel they
do not appear. Modern geographical names appear in the spelling
of the authorities cited.
The completion of this volume had already been much delayed
through serious illness, when in January, 1906, I suddenly lost
the sight of nearly one-half the field of vision in both eyes. I felt
then that I should relinquish my task, but Professor Briggs, the
general editor, persuaded me to continue it and kindly allowed me
to use the services of an assistant. I was fortunate in securing
those of Doctor Madsen, a pupil of Prof. C. C. Torrey. He has
worked jointly with me upon the book since that date, and while
I am solely responsible for the work, his name properly appears
upon the title-page. The parts which he has especially prepared
under my direction are sections seven, eight, and of nine the
Literature, of the Introduction, the commentary and notes on
PREFACE ix
I Ch. XXI-XXIX, which had formed the subject of his doctor's
thesis, and the textual notes on 2 Ch. XX-XXXVI. He has also
amplified my own comment and textual notes on other portions
and contributed notes on the composition of i Ch. I-IX, XV, XVI,
and 2 Ch. I-IX. He worked out the restoration of the genealogy
of Zebulun, i Ch. VII, and I am also indebted to him for most
eflScient aid in preparing the manuscript for the press and in
proof-reading.
I wish also to express my appreciation for assistance rendered
in many ways by Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University. Too
much cannot be said of the care exercised by the publishers in
carrying this work through the press.
This volume has many shortcomings, but I trust that it will fill a
needed place, since nothing similar has been published in English
later than Zoeckler's commentary in Lange's Commentary in 1876.
EDWARD LEWIS CURTIS.
New Haven, Conn.,
May, 1910.
CONTENTS
PAGE
PREFACE vii
ABBREVIATIONS xiii
INTRODUCTION:
§ I. Name and Order i
§ 2. The Relation of Chronicles to Ezra and Nehemiah 2
§ 3- Date 5
§ 4. Plan, Purpose, and Historical Value 6
§ 5. The Religious Value 16
§ 6. Sources ~ . . . . 17
" § 7. Peculiarities of Diction 27
§ 8. Hebrew Text and the Versions 36
§ 9. The Higher Criticism and Literature .... 44
COMMENTARY ON 1 CHRONICLES:
I-IX. Genealogical Tables with Geographical
AND Historical Notices 57
X-XXIX. The History of David 180
COMMENTARY ON 2 CHRONICLES:
I-IX. The History of Solomon . 313
X-XXXVI. The History of Judah from Rehoboam until
the Exile 362
ADDENDA 527
INDEXES 529
ABBREVIATIONS.
I. TEXTS AND VERSIONS.
A
= Arabic Version.
(g*
= Original Greek
ARV.
= American Revised
w h ere leading
Version.
MSS. (uncials)
ARVm.
= American Revised
are corrupt.
Version, marginal
(g^-
= Sinaitic codex.
reading.
(g^
= Alexandrian codex.
AV.
= Authorized Ver-
(gB
= Vatican codex (as
sion.
pub. by Swete).
^Comp
= Complutensian edi-
D
= Deuteronomic por-
tion (1514-17).
tions of the Old
(gL
= Lucianic recension
Testament, or
(Lagarde's edi-
their author.
tion).
Dtic.
= Deuteronomic.
(gN
= Basilian - Vatican
codex (=XI
E
= Elohistic (Ephra-
Holmes and Par-
imitic) portions
sons).
of the Hexateuch,
ERV.
or their author.
= English Revised
^
= Hebrew consonant-
al text.
EVs.
Version.
= English Versions.
H
= Holiness Code of
the Hexateuch.
(&
= Received Greek
Version.
Hex.
= Hexateuch.
« (of I Esd.)
= The Greek text of
J
= Yahwistic (Judaic)
I Esdras (prob-
portions of the
ably original Sep-
Hexateuch, or
tuagint and avail-
their author.
able for 2 Ch. 35.
JE
= The narrative of J
36).
and E combined.
Xlll
XIV
Kt.
m
M
NT.
OT.
P
ABBREVIATIONS
Knhib, the He-
Qr.
= Q«re, the Hebrew
brew text as writ-
text as read.
ten.
Old Latin Version.
R
RV.
= Redactor, or editor.
= Revised Version.
The Massoretic
RVm.
= Revised \'ersion.
pointed text.
marginal r e a d -
Kittel's primary
Midrashic source
ing.
of the Chronicler.
Kittel's secondary'
Midrashic source
of the Chronicler.
= Syriac P e s h i 1 1 o
Version.
= Ambrosian codex.
New Testament.
m
= Targum or Aramaic
Old Testament.
Version.
Priestly portions of
the Hexateuch, or
= Vulgate Version
= Amiatine codex.
their author.
Vrss.
= Versions, ancient.
II. BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.
Am.
= Amos.
Ez.
= Ezekiel.
Ezr.
= Ezra.
BS.
= The Wisdom of
Jesus Ben Sira,
Gal.
= Galatians.
or Ecclesiasticus.
Gn.
= Genesis.
I, 2 Ch.
Ch.
Col.
I, 2 Cor.
Ct.
= 1,2 Chronicles.
= id., taken together.
= Colossians.
= I, 2 Corinthians.
= Canticles = The
Hb.
Heb.
Hg.
Ho.
= Habakkuk
= Hebrews.
= Haggai.
= Hosea.
Song of Songs.
Is
= Isaiah.
Dn.
= Daniel.
Dt.
= Deuteronomy.
Jb.
Je.
= Job.
= Jeremiah.
Ec.
= Ecclesiastes.
Jn.
= John.
Eph.
= Ephesians.
Jo.
= Joel.
I, 2 Esd.
= I, 2 Esdras.
Jon.
= Jonah.
Est.
= Esther.
Jos.
= Joshua.
Ex.
= Exodus.
Ju-
= Judges.
ABBREVIATIONS
XV
I, 2K.
=
I, 2 Kings.
Ps.
= Psalms.
K.
=
id., taken together.
Rev.
= Revelation.
La.
=
Lamentations.
Rom.
= Romans.
Lk.
=
Luke.
Ru.
= Ruth.
Lv.
^
Leviticus.
I, 2 S.
= r, 2 Samuel.
Mai.
=
Malachi.
s.
= id., taken together.
I, 2 Mac.
=
I, 2 Maccabees.
S.-K.
= The books of Sam-
Mi.
=
Micah.
uel and Kings
Mk.
=
Mark.
taken together.
Mt.
=:
Matthew.
I, 2 Thes.
= 1,2 Thessalonians.
Na.
=
Nahum.
I, 2 Tim.
= 1,2 Timothy.
Ne.
=
Nehemiah.
Tob.
= Tobit.
Nu.
=
Numbers.
Wisd.
= Wisdom of Solo-
Ob.
=
Obadiah.
mon.
Phil.
=
Philippians.
Zc.
= Zechariah.
Pr.
^^
Proverbs.
Zp.
= Zephaniah.
III. AUTHORS AND WRITINGS.
AHT.
= Ancient Heb. Tra-
Ball
^ C. J. Ball.
ditions, see Hom.
SBOT.
= id., Genesis in Sa-
AJSL.
= American Journal
cred Books of the
of Semitic Lan-
OT.
guages and Lit-
Baud.
= W. von Baudissen.
eratures.
BDB
= Hebrew and Eng-
ATC.
= Apparatus for the
lish Lexicon of
Textual Criticism
the OT., edited by
of Ch.-Ezr.-Ne.,
F. Brown, S. R.
see Tor.
Driver, C. A.
Briggs.
Ba.
= W. E. Barnes,
Be.
= E. Bertheau, Die
Chronicles in The
Bilcher der Chro-
Cambridge Bible.
fiik- in Hand-
Baed.
= Karl Baedeker,
buch zum A. T.
Palestine and
Bennett
= W. H. Bennett.
Syria (cited in
SBOT.
= id., Joshua in 5a-
second and fourth
cred Books of tite
editions).
OT.
XVI
ABBREV
I ATI ON S
Bn.
= J. Bcnzinger, Die
Del.
= Franz Delitzsch
B ilcher der
(alw. when not
Konige and Die
followed by Par.,
B ilcher der Chro-
V. i.).
nik in Kurzer
Del.
= Friedrich Delitzsch.
Hand - Conimen-
Par.
= id., Wo lag das
tar.
Paradies?
Arch.
= id., Hebraische Ar-
Dill.
= August Dillmann.
chcBologie.
Dr.
= S. R. Driver.
Boch.
= S. Bochart.
Di.
= id., Deuteronomy in
Boe.
= F. Bottcher.
The International
Bu.
= K. Budde, Richter
Critical Commen-
und Samuel in
tary.
Kurzer H and-
Gn.
= id.. Genesis in
Commentar ziim
Westmitister Com-
A. T.
mentaries.
SBOT.
= id., Samuel in 5a-
LOT.
= id., An Introduction
cred Books of the
to the Literature of
OT.
the OT.
Bue.
= A. Biichler.
TH.
= id., A Treatise ontJie
Buhl
= F. Buhl.
Use of the Tenses
GAP.
= id., Geographic des
in Hebrews.
Alien Palastina.
TS.
= id., Notes on the
Bur.
= C. F. Burney, Notes
Hebrew Text of
on the Hebrew
the Books of Sam-
Text of Kings.
uel.
CHV.
= Composition and
EBi.
= Eticyclopcedia Bib-
Cor.
COT.
Historical Value
of Ezra-Nehe-
miah, see Tor.
= C. H. Cornill.
= The Cuneiform In-
EHSP.
Ew.
Ew. §
lica.
= Early Hist, of Syria
and Pal., see Pa.
= H. Ewald.
= id., Hebrew Gram-
scriptions and
the OT, (Eng.
trans, of if^r.^),
see Sch.
Hist.
mar.
= id., History of Is-
rael (Eng. trans.
of his Geschichte
d. V. Israel).
Dav.
Syn. §
= A. B. Davidson.
= id., Hebrew Syn-
tax.
Exp.
Expos. T.
= The Expositor.
= The Expository
Times.
DB.
= Dictionary of the
GAP.
= Geographic des Al-
,
Bible, usually
Hastings'.
len Palastina, by
F. Buhl.
ABBREVIATIONS
XVll
GAS.
= George Adam
H-J.
= W. R. Harvey-
Smith.
Jellie.
HCHL.
= id.. The Historical
HJP.
= History of the Jew-
Geography of the
ish People, see
Holy Land.
Schiir.
J.
= id., Jerusalem from
Holz.
= H. Holzinger.
the Earliest Times
Gn.
= id.. Genesis in Kur-
to A. D. 70.
zer Hand-Com-
Ges.
= W. Gesenius, He-
mentar.
brew Grammar,
Hom.
= F. Hommel.
ed. E. Kautzsch
AHT.
= id., Ancient He-
(Eng. trans, by
brew Traditions.
Collins and Cow-
HPM.
= History, Prophecy
ley).
and the Monu-
GFM.
= George Foot
ments, see McC.
Moore.
Hpt.
= Paul Haupt.
Gin.
= C. D. Ginsburg.
HWB.'^
= Gesenius' Hebrii-
Gl.
= E. Glaser.
isches und Ara-
Skiz.
= id., Skizze der
mdisches Hand-
Gcschichte und
wbrterbuch iiber
Geographic Ara-
das A. T., ed.
biens, vol. II.
Buhl.
Graf
= K. H. Graf.
GB.
Gray
HPN.
= id., Gescli. Biicher
d. A. T.
= G. B. Gray.
= id., Hebrew Proper
JBL.
JE.
= Journal of Biblical
Literature.
= Jewish Encyclopae-
dia.
Nu.
Gu.
Gn.
Names.
= id.. Numbers in In-
ternational Criti-
cal Commentary.
= H. Gunkel.
= id.. Genesis in
Handkommenlar
z.A.T.
Jen.
Kosmol.
J. H. Mich.
Jos.
Ant.
= P. Jensen.
= id.. Die Kosmolo-
gie der Babylonier.
= J. H. Michaelis,
Uberiores Adnot.
in Chron.
= Fl. Josephus.
= Antiquities.
BJ.
= Bell. Jud.
HC.
= Kurzer Hand-
Commentar zum
A. T.
c. Ap.
JPT.
= contra Apionem.
= JahrbilcherfUr prot-
estantische The-
HCM.
= Higher Criticism
and the Monu-
ments, see Sayce.
JQR.
ologie.
= Jewish Quarterly
Review.
Hdt.
= Herodotus.
Hitz.
= F. Hitzig.
Kamp.
= A. Kamphausen.
XVlll
AiJBKlLVJ
lAilUiNS
KAT.'
= Die Keilinschrijten
HPM.
= id., History, Proph-
u. d. A. T., see
ecy and ttie Mon-
Winck.
uments.
K.au.
= E. Kautzsch, Die
Mov.
= F. C. Movers.
Iieilige Schrift d.
MuNDPV.
= Mittheilungen und
A. T.
Nachrichten des
KB.
= Keilinschriftliche
Deutsche n Pal-
Bibliothek.
dstina-Vereins.
Ke.
= C. F. Keil, Chroni-
MVAG.
= Mittheil u n gen
cles in Biblical
der vorderasiati-
Commentary on
schen Gesellschaft.
tJie OT.
Kennic.
= B. Kennicott.
NCB.
= New Century Bible.
Ki.
= R. Kittel.
Now.
= W. Nowack.
BH.
= id., Biblia Hebra-
Arch.
= id., Lehrbuch d.
ica.
Hebrdischen Ar-
Gesch.
= id., Geschichte der
Hebrder.
chdologie.
Kotn.
= id.. Die Bilcher der
Oe.
= S. Oettli, Die
Chronik in Hand-
Biicher der Chro-
kommentar sum
nik in Kurzge-
A. T.
fasster Komnien-
SBOT.
= id., Chronicles in
tar.
Sacred Books of
OLZ.
= Orientalische Lit-
the OT.
teratur-Zeitung.
Klo.
= August Kloster-
Onom.
= Onomastica Sacra
mann.
(ed. Lagarde).
Koe. §
= Fr. E. Konig,
OTJC-
= Old Testament in
Lehrgebdude der
the Jewish
Hebrdisclien
Church, see
Sprache.
WRS.
Kuenen
= A. Kuenen.
Einl.
= id., Historisch-
Pa.
= L. B. Paton.
krilische Einlei-
tung in dieBUcher
d. A. T.
EHSP.
= id.. The Early His-
tory of Syria and
Palestine.
PRE.
= Herzog's Real-En-
LOT.
= An Introduction to
cyclopddie fiir
the Literature of
protestantisclie
the OT., see
Theologie und
Dr.
Kirche.
Ptol.
= Claudius Ptolemy.
Mar.
= J. Marquart.
McC.
= J. F. McCurdy.
Ri.
= E. Riehm.
ABBREVIATIONS
XIX
HWB.
= id., Handworter-
List.
=id., Die Listen der
buch d. bibl. Al-
Biicher Ezra iind
terth.
Nehemiah.
Rob.
= Edward Robinson.
SS.
= C. Siegfried and B.
BR. or Res.
= id., Biblical Re-
Stade, Hebrdisch-
seardies in Pal-
es Worterbuch.
estine, etc., also
St.
= B. Stade.
Later Biblical Re-
Gesch.
= id., Geschichte des
searches, i.e., Vol.
Volkes Israel.
Ill of second ed.
SBOT.
= id., with Sw., Tlie
Books of Kings in
Sayce
= A. H. Sayce.
Sacred Books of
HCM.
= id., Higher Criti-
the OT.
cism and the
Sw.
= F. Schwally, v. s.
Monuments.
SWP.
= Survey of Western
Pat. Pal.
= id.. Patriarchal Pal-
estine.
Palestine.
SBOT.
= The Sacred Books
Th.
= O. Thenius.
of the Old Testa-
TKC.
= T. K. Cheyne.
-
ment, ed. by Paul
Tor.
= C. C. Torrey.
Haupt.
ATC.
= id., Apparatus for
Sch.
= E. Schrader.
the Textual Crit-
COT.
= id., Cmieiform In-
icism of Chroni-
scriptions and the
cle s-E z r a-Nehe-
Old Testament.
miah in OT. Se-
Schur.
= E. Schiirer.
mitic Studies,
Gesch.
= id., Geschichte des
Harper Memo-
jUdischen Volkes
rial II.
im Zeitalter Jesu
CHV.
= id.. The Composi-
Christe.
tion and His-
HJP.
= id.. History of the
torical Value of
Jewish People in
Ezra-Nehemiah
the Time of Jesus
in Zeitschrift fiir
C/im<(Eng.trans.
die altest. Wis-
of the second ed.
senschaft, Bei-
of the above).
hefte 2.
Sk.
= J. Skinner, Kings
Trom.
= A. Trommius.
in New Century
Concord.
= id., ConcordanticB
Bible.
GrcEcce in Septiia-
Sm.
= H. P. Smith, The
Books of Samuel
ginta Interpretes.
in International
We.
= JuHus Wellhausen.
Critical Commen-
Comp.
= id.. Die Composi-
tary.
tion des Hexa-
Smd.
= R. Smend.
teuchs.
XX
ABBREV
lATIONS
DGJ.
= id., De Gentihus ct
Familiis Judais
ZA.
= Zeitschrift fiir As-
syriologie.
qua in i Chr. 2. 4
ZAW.
= Zeitschrift fiir die
nwnerantur Dis-
Alttestamentliche
sertatio.
Wissenschaft.
Prol.
= id., Prolegomena to
tJie History of
Israel.
ZDMG.
= Zeitschrift der
Deutsclien Mor-
genldndischen
TS.
= id., Der Text der
Gesellschaft.
Bilcher Samuelis.
ZDPV.
= Zeitschrift des
Winck.
= Hugo Winckler.
Deutschen- Pal-
Gesch. Isr.
= id., Geschichte Is-
dstina-vereins.
raels.
Zoe.
= Otto Z5ckler, The
KAT.'
WRS.
= id., with H. Zim-
mern, Keilin-
schiften u. Alte
Testament.
= W. Robertson
Books of Chroni-
cles in Eng. trans.
of Lange's Com-
mentary.
Smith.
Numerals raised above the line im-
OTJC?
= id.. Old Testament
mediately
following the abbreviation
in the Jewish
indicate
the
edition of the work
Church.
cited.
IV. GENERAL, ESPECIALLY GRAMMATICAL.
abs.
= absolute.
art.
= article.
abstr.
= abstract.
Assy.
= Assyria, Assyrian,
ace.
= accusative.
ace. cog.
= cognate ace.
Bab.
= Babylonian.
ace. pers.
= ace. of person.
B. Aram.
= Biblical Aramaic.
ace. rei.
= ace. of thing.
ace. to
= according to.
c, cc.
= chapter, chapters.
act.
= active.
c.
= circa, about.
adj.
= adjective.
caus.
= causative.
adv.
= adverb.
cf.
= confer, compare.
4ir.
= ttira^ XeyS/jievov,
cod., codd.
= codex, codices.
word or phr. used
cog.
= cognate.
once.
col., coll.
= column, columns.
alw.
= always.
com.
= commentary.
apod.
= apodosis.
cp.
= compare.
Ar.
= Arabic.
concr.
= concrete.
Aram.
= Aramaic, Aramean.
conj.
= conjunction.
ABBREVIATIONS
XXI
consec.
= consecutive.
1.
= list of the peculi-
constr.
= construction.
arities of Ch. in
cstr.
= construct.
Introduction, pp.
28-36.
d. f.
def.
del.
= daghesh forte.
= defective.
= dele, strike out.
I.e.
lit.
= loco citato, in the
place before cited.
= literal, literally.
dittog.
dub.
= dittography.
= dubious, doubtful.
masc.
mod.
= masculine.
= modern.
ed.
elsw.
= edition.
= elsewhere.
n.
NH.
= note.
= New Hebrew.
esp.
etal.
= especially.
= et aliter, and else-
Niph.
= Niphal of verb.
where, and others.
obj.
= object.
oft.
= often.
f;ff-
= and following.
fern.
fig-
f. n.
freq.
= feminine.
= figurative.
= foot-note.
= frequentative.
p., pp.
pers.
pass,
pf.
= page, pages.
= person.
= passive.
= perfect.
Pi.
= Piel of verb.
gent,
gen.
= gentilic.
= genitive.
pi.
pred.
preg.
= plural.
= predicate.
= pregnant.
haplo.
Heb.
Hiph.
Hithp.
= haplography.
= Hebrew.
= Hiphil of verb.
= Hithpael of verb.
prep.
prob.
pron.
ptc.
Pu.
= preposition.
= probable.
= pronoun.
= participle.
= Pual of verb.
U.
= idem, the .same.
q. V.
= quod vide, which
impf.
= imperfect.
see.
imv.
= imperative.
indef.
= indefinite.
refl.
= reflexive.
i. e.
= id est, that is.
rel.
= relative.
inf.
= infinitive.
ins.
= inscription, inscrip-
Sab.
= Sabean.
tions.
sf.
= suffix.
intrans.
= intransitive.
sg-
= singular.
Intro.
= Introduction.
sq.
= followed by.
subst.
= substantive.
iuss.
= jussive.
Syr.
= Syriac.
xxn
AtStSKI-.\
/1A.11W1N:
■>
t.
= times (following a
V. i.
= vide infra, see be-
number).
low (usually tex-
trans.
= transitive.
tual note on same
text. n.
= textual note.
verse).
viz.
= videlicet, namely,
to wit.
V. s.
= vide supra, see
v., w.
= verse, verses.
above (usually
V.
= vide, see.
general remark
vb.
= verb.
on same verse).
V. OTHER SIGNS.
t
t
+
V
I
'1J1
indicates all passages cited.
indicates all passages in Ch.-
Ezr.-Ne. cited.
parallel, of words or clauses
chiefly synonymous.
equivalent, equals.
plus, denotes that other pas-
sages might be cited.
= the root, or stem.
= sign of abbreviation in He-
brew words.
= icui, and so forth.
= Yahweh.
* indicates that Massoretic text
has not been followed, but
either Vrss. or conjectural
emendations.
Biblical passages are cited accord-
ing to the Hebrew enumeration of
chapters and verses: where this dif-
fers in the English, the reference to
the latter has usually (except in
textual notes) been added in paren-
theses.
INTRODUCTION.
NAME AND ORDER.
The Hebrew name for i and 2 Chronicles, which were counted
as one book in the Hebrew Canon, was Dibre hayyamim ('^"l^T
D^i^Tl), The events of days or times, Daily events. This expression
preceded by the word book is of frequent occurrence in i and 2 K.
((/. I K. 14' 9- " 15^ "■ " and oft.), also in Est. 2-^ 6' lo^ and i Ch.
27" and Ne. 12", but always (except Est. 2" 6' and Ne. 12") with
the days defined, as, for example, the book of the days 0/ King
David (i Ch. 27-^), or of the days of the Kings of Israel (i K. 14").
Thus also the Targum further defmes the days of this title as
"from the days of antiquity" (SO^V ^^^^ j'^l) (PRE.^ iv. p. 85).
It is not altogether unHkely that originally of the Kings of Judah
belonged to this Hebrew title ((/. the title in ($^ immediately
mentioned).
The Greek title was originally The things omitted concerning
the kings of Jiidah in a twofold division (TrapaXenrofjLevcov
BacnXecov lovSa a, ditto rcov ^aaiXeicov lovSa /3 (^^ Swete).
The other uncials omit "BacnXecov lovSa and rcov B' I', but the
originality of this addition is witnessed by the nomenclature in
the Ethiopic Church and by the Syriac version (Bacher, ZAW.
XV. 1895, p. 305). This Greek title was appropriate, since the
material of i and 2 Ch. apparently supplements the narratives
of I and 2 S. and i and 2 K.
Jerome, while retaining the Greek title Paralipomenon, sug-
gested that of Chronicles, "since," he said, remarking on the
Hebrew title, "we might more significantly call it the chronicle
of the whole of sacred history." {Quod significantius Chronicon
2 CHRONICLES
toHus divincB historic possumus appellare) {Prol. galeat.). Thus
arose the name adopted in our English versions. Luther used
the same in his translation Die Chronika.
In the printed Hebrew Bibles Chronicles is the last book of the
"Writings" or the third division of the Hebrew Canon. This is
its place according to the Talmud and the majority of Hebrew
Mss. Some mss., however, among them the St. Petersburg Baby-
lonian Codex and two in the British Museum, and the Spanish
codices generally, place Chronicles at the beginning of the Kagiog-
rapha. A Massoretic treatise, Adahalh Dehharim (1207 A.D.),
declares this to have been the orthodox Palestinian order. This,
however, is very doubtful. Chronicles by its late composition and '
supplementary character correctly finds its place at the close of the
Hebrew Canon. The references in Mt. 23" suggest also that at
the time of Christ, or the collection of his sayings, this book closed
the Canon. The transposition to the beginning of the Hagiog-
rapha probably was because the bulk of its history preceded the
dates assigned for most of the remaining Hagiographa. (On the
order of the Hagiographa see Paton's Esther, pp. 1-3 ; Ginsburg's
Introduction, pp. 1-8.) While in rabbinical literature Chronicles
was regarded with suspicion, its historical accuracy being doubted
by Talmudic authorities and it being held to be a book for homi-
letical interpretation, yet its canonicity, as some have thought,
never seems really to have been questioned (/£. iv. p. 60; Buhl,
Canon and Text of the OT. p. 31).
In the Greek version Chronicles follows the Books of Kings
(which include i and 2 S.). Occasionally it precedes them or
drops out altogether. But these variations were local or individual
and find no support in the uncial mss. of the Greek Bible (Swete,
Intro, to the OT. in Greek, p. 397). The order in the English Bible
is derived from the Greek through its use in the Vulgate.
§ 2. THE RELATION OF CHRONICLES TO EZRA AND NEHEMIAH.
The Books of Chronicles are usually assigned to the same au-
thor as that of Ezra and Nehemiah, which also are reckoned in the
Hebrew Canon as one book. This is not only the general opin-
RELATION TO EZRA AND NEHEMIAH 3
ion of modern scholarship, but also was that of the Talmud, which
ascribed them to Ezra. (Baba bath f. 15. i Ezra scripsit librum
suum et genealogiam in libro Chronicorum ad se.) This also was
the general view of the rabbins, the Church fathers, and the older
commentators, at least as far as the Book of Ezra was concerned,
that both that book and Chronicles were written by the same
author, presumably Ezra. (For a list of those holding this opin-
ion see Zoe. pp. 8/.) (Owing to the separation of Nehemiah from
Ezra and the memoirs of Nehemiah being written in the first
person, the view became widely prevalent that Nehemiah was the
author of the book called by his name.) The reasons for finding
a common authorship of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah are as
follows : —
(i) The ending of Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra are the
same (2 Ch. 36" '• =Ezr. i'-'^ to go up). This suggests that they
were originally one work, a common portion of each book being
retained at their point of separation when they were cloven asun-
der, that their original unity might be recognised. This argu-
ment, of course, only has force in view of the order of the books in
the Hebrew Canon. The abrupt close of 2 Ch. is most naturally
explained on the ground that originally it was continued by the
story of the return given in Ezr. i.
The separation in the Canon is apparently due to the fact that
the contents of Ezra-Nehemiah were regarded as the more im-
portant, since its narrative was a proper continuation of the
sacred history already canonised in i and 2 S. and i and 2 K.,
and its narrative chronologically concluded the history of Israel;
while Chronicles was only supplementary to i and 2 S. and i
and 2 K., and therefore was not at first very highly valued and
was only at a later period received into the Canon.
Zoe., following Bleek {Einl.* § 149), doubts the unity of authorship and
thinks the identity of 2 Ch. 36- '• and Ezr. i'-^'' better explained as coming
from an editor (the author of i and 2 Ch.) who wished the second of two
distinct works to be recognised as a kind of continuation of the first.
He also holds that the plan of Ezra-Nehemiah in presenting recent
history is against an original immediate connection with i and 2 Ch.
(pp. 9/.).
4 CHRONICLES
(2) The same general character pervades both works. Both
show a fondness for the following particulars: —
A. Genealogical and other lists of families and persons.
Thus in Chronicles are the genealogies of the families of the twelve
tribes and the houses of Saul and David (i Ch. 1-8); the inhabitants of
Jerusalem (9'-^'); ^^e mighty men in David's armies (ii^^"); David's
recruits at Ziglag (12^-'- '-"• ^o); the Levites, priests, and musicians that
assisted in the removal of the ark. (is^-"- i'-2j^; the families of the Levites
(236-23)1 the twenty-four courses of priests (24'-"); heads of families,
Kohathites and Merarites (242°-3i); the twenty-four courses of singers,
their names twice repeated (2^'-^'); the courses of gate-keepers (26'-");
overseers of the Temple treasury {26''°-"^); Levitical officers outside the
Temple (2623-32); the twelve commanders of the twelve courses of the
army (27'-'=); the princes of the tribes of Israel (ly^^--^); the twelve officers
over David's substance (27=^-31); princes, Levites, and priests sent by
Jehoshaphat to give instruction in the law (2 Ch. 17''); Levitical cap-
tains under Jehoiada (23'); Levitical leaders in cleansing the Temple
and Levites in charge of offerings in Kezekiah's reign (29'2-" 31'^-'*);
Levites mentioned in connection with the repair of the Temple and the
distribution of offerings at the passover festival in the reign of Josiah
(34' "^ 35')- These are paralleled in Ezra-Nehemiah by the lists of the
leaders, and of the families of the laity, the priests, the Levites, the
singers, the gate-keepers, the Nethinim, the servants of Solomon, and
those without genealogy who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezr. 2^-*' Ne.
^7-63)- jjy the lists of those who returned with Ezra (Ezr. S--"); of those
both priests, Levites, singers, gate-keepers, and laity who had foreign
wives (Ezr. 10"-"); of those who signed the covenant, the governor,
priests, Levites, and chiefs of the people (Ne. lo" -='*); of the priests and
Levites who participated in the promulgation of the law (Ne. 8^- ' 9^' );
of the builders of the wall of Jerusalem (Ne. 3'-"); of the princes (?),
priests, and Levites who participated in the dedication of the wall (Ne.
J 232-36. 41.42); q{ the residcnts of Jerusalem (corresponding to the list of
I Ch. 9) (Ne. ii^-'s). We also have pedigrees corresponding to those
in Chronicles, those of Ezra (Ezr. 71 -s) and of Jaddua (Ne. i2"'-'i).
B. Both works show a fondness for the description of the
celebrations of special religious occasions.
In I and 2 Ch. are descriptions of the bringing up of the ark (i Ch.
15-16), of the dedication of the Temple (2 Ch. 5-7'°), of the restoration
of the worship of Yahweh and the celebration of the passover under
Hezekiah (2 Ch. 29-31), and of the passover under Josiah (2 Ch. 35);
and in Ezra-Nehemiah are descriptions of the erection of the altar at
DATE 5
the time of Joshua and Zerubbabcl (Ezr. 3), of the dedication of the
Temple (Ezr. o'^"), of the celebration of the passover (Ezr. 613-22)^ of
the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles in connection with the read-
ing of the law (Ne. S^-'s), and of the dedication of the walls (Ne. 12"-").
C. In the attention paid to the priests, the Levites, and espe-
cially to the musicians or singers and the gate-keepers, which latter
classes are not mentioned elsewhere in the OT.
The musicians are mentioned in i Ch. 6'6i- (sm ) 9331^16-21. 27 f. 164-42
235 c. 25 2 Ch. 5'2s. 76 gu 1. 2o"- =' 23"- '8 2g^-"^- 30 30=' '■ 3412 3515 and in
Ezr. 3'° '• Ne. 11'' 128- -*■ "--^- "-■" 135- '". The gate-keepers are men-
tioned (often with the singers) in i Ch. 917-29 15I8. 23. 24 16" 23^ 26' 12-"
2 Ch. 8'< 23<- 19 3in 3413 3^15 and in Ezr. 2«- 'O f 10" Ne. 7'- « lo^' "s)
„i9 1225. 45. 47 135 (Be. pp. xiv./.).
Thus, whatever are the sources of these writings, exactly the
same interest and motive of compilation or authorship appear in
both, hence the conclusion that both are from the same person is
irresistible. This is still further supported by the following fact : —
(3) Both works exhibit in a marked degree the same linguistic
peculiarities. This is fully exhibited in the list of the Chronicler's
peculiarities of diction given on pp. 2^ ff.
§ 3- DATE.
The data for determining the exact period of i and 2 Ch.
taken from those books are very meagre. The books close with a
reference to a decree of Cyrus in the first year of his reign (537
B.C.), hence they cannot be earlier than that date. Money also is
reckoned in darics (i Ch. 29'), the Persian coinage introduced by
Darius I. (521-486 B.C.), hence they do not fall within the be-
ginnings of the Persian period (537-332 B.C.). Then again the
genealogy of David's family is apparently brought do^^^^ to the
sixth generation after Zerubbabel (who flourished 537 -H) (i Ch.
3"-2<). This makes the date for i and 2 Ch., reckoning thirty
years for a generation, not earlier than about 350 B.C. The Greek,
Syriac, and Latin texts, however, read i Ch. 3"-" differently (see in
loco), bringing the genealogy down to the eleventh generation after
Zerubbabel. This would place the date, reckoning again thirty
6 CHRONICLES
years for a generation, at about 200 B.C. Thirty years, however, are
probably longer than an actual generation among the Hebrews.
Kamphauscn reckoning on the descent of the Hebrew kings fixes
the length at twenty-three years {Chronologic derhebr.Komge, pp.
38 /.); Kittel makes a generation even less, only twenty years
{Kom. p. 26). On this last basis eleven generations after Zerub-
babel would extend only to about 300 B.C. Yet (^, ^, and H
probably have simply interpreted the difficult ^ text, and hence
do not really furnish a trustworthy basis for a date. The read-
ing of the Vrss. was preferred by Kuenen (Einl. I. 2, § 29, i);
also by Wildeboer {Die Litteratiir des A. T. ^ 25, 2).
But since i and 2 Ch. originally were joined to Ezra-Nehemiah,
the period of the Chronicler can also be determined from those
books. The Hst of the high priests given in Ne. 12'° '• " '• extends
to Jaddua, who according to Josephus {Ant. xi. 7, 8) was high
priest in the time of Alexander the Great. Darius is referred to
as the Persian (Ne. 12") in a way that suggests that the Persian
kingdom had already fallen and that the time of Alexander (336-
323 B.C.) had been reached. Thus the close of the fourth century
B.C., or30o, may be confidently given as the period of the Chronicler.
The scholars who regarded Ezra as the author of i and 2 Ch. and also
of the Book of Ezra, have refused to allow the implications just mentioned
drawn from i Ch. 3''-", holding either that the passage contained no
list of six or more generations after Zerubbabel (Davis, DB. p. 125), or
that it was an insertion (Keil held both of these views, Comm. p. 82);
and likewise those who held that Nehemiah wrote his book have regarded
the lists of priests in Ne. i2'-25 either as an insertion (Lange Crosby, Ne.
p. 2) or as a list of descendants of the priestly family, the last of whom,
Jaddua, might have been known to Nehemiah in his extreme old age
(Keil, Intro., trans, by Douglas, § 149).
§ 4. PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE.
The Books of Chronicles are a history of the kingdom of Judah
from the enthronement of David to the fall of Jerusalem. This
history begins with a long introduction, consisting in the main of a
series of genealogical tables, showing the origin of Israel from the
beginning of mankind, and their connection with other peoples
PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE 7
(material derived from the Hexateuch), and giving likewise the
clans or families of the tribes of Israel, with particular regard to
those of Levi, Judah, and Benjamin (the three tribes most impor-
tant for the post-exilic community), and also a list of the inhabi-
tants of Jerusalem (i Ch. 1-9). Then commences the history
proper, introduced with an account of the death of Saul (i Ch. 10).
This history is written throughout from a priestly point of view.
The writer is concerned above everything else with the life of
Israel centred in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem. He
dwells at length upon the removal of the ark by David (i Ch. 13,
15-16);' upon his thought of a temple (i Ch. 17) and his prepara-
tions for its building (i Ch. 21, 22, 28, 29); upon its structure
and furniture and dedication under Solomon (2 Ch. 2-7); upon
its repairs in the reigns of Joash, Hezekiah, and Josiah (2 Ch.
24*'< 29'-" 34'"). And in connection with these last two re-
pairs are given notable descriptions of passover festivals cele-
brated at the Temple (2 Ch. 30, 35'-'').
The ministry of the Temple is also fully described. The divi-
sions of the Levites and the priests and the singers and the gate-
keepers, which are represented as established by David, are given
at length (i Ch. 23-26). These ministers also not only take a
prominent part in all the events connected with the Temple men-
tioned above, but appear repeatedly in other history. Priests
and Levites resort unto Rehoboam on the division of the kingdom
(2 Ch. II" ' ). They are appointed by Jehoshaphat as teachers of
the law (2 Ch. 17^') and as judges (2 Ch. i98«). Levites take a
prominent part in the coronation of Joash and the death of Atha-
Hah (2 Ch. 23' ^•). Priests withstand Uzziah when he would burn
incense in the Temple (2 Ch. 26"^).
The activity of the singers, or musicians, is prominent. They
are mentioned not only in connection with the removal of the ark
(i Ch. 15, 16) and the dedication of the Temple (2 Ch. 5"'),
but they appear with the army of Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. 20»'), at
the coronation of Joash (2 Ch. 23"), at the cleansing of the Tem-
ple and the celebration of the passover under Hezekiah (2 Ch.
2Qi3b. 14. 25-28. 30 302'), and at similar events under Josiah (2 Ch. 34"
35"). Their descent is also elaborately given (i Ch. 6"" *"-r>).
8 CHRONICLES
The writer, then, is of the same school as the author of the
Priests' Code. Equally with him he delights in all that pertains
to the ministry of the sanctuary. He also has the same fondness
for statistics, and exhibits repeatedly similar exaggerations. He
gives the weight or value of the gold 100,000 talents, silver
1,000,000 talents, which David prepared as king for the Temple
(i Ch. 22"); also 3,000 talents of gold and 7,000 of silver which
David gave from his private purse (i Ch. 29^); and then again
of gold 5,000 talents and 10,000 darics, of silver 10,000 talents, of
brass 18,000 talents, of iron 100,000 talents, contributed by the
rulers for the building of the Temple (i Ch. 29'); and likewise he
gives in thousands the number of sheep and cattle offered at re-
ligious festivals (i Ch. 29=' 2 Ch. 29"'- 3024 35'' ); and the number
of warriors: those who came to make David king, from the tribes
of Israel, 6,800, 7,100, 4,600, 3,700, 3,000, 20,800, iS,ooo, 50,000,
37,000, 28,600, 40,000, and 120,000 (i Ch. I2"-'* (=3.37)^; the officers
of David in twelve divisions of 24,000 each, one division serving
a month (i Ch. 27'-'*); the warriors of Rehoboam 180,000 (2 Ch.
II'); of Abijah 400,000 (2 Ch. 13'); of Jeroboam 800,000, of whom
500,000 were slain (2 Ch. i3^'0; o^ Asa from Judah 300,000, from
Benjamin 280,000 (2 Ch. 14^), and of Zerah his opponent 1,000,000
(2 Ch. 14'); of Jehoshaphat in five divisions of 300,000, 280,000,
200,000, 200,000, and 180,000 each (2 Ch. t7'*-'«); of Amaziah
300,000 and 100,000 more who were hired (2 Ch. 25^ '■); of Uzziah
307,500 under 2,600 chiefs (2 Ch. 26'-); and of Ahaz (the total
number of whose warriors is not given) 120,000 who were slain in
one day (2 Ch. 28'').
The writer likewise, after the manner of P, indulges in registers
of names. These not only appear in the genealogical tables of the
introduction (i Ch. 1-9) and in the classification of the ministers of
the Temple and the officers of David (i Ch. 23-27), but in fists of
heroes who came to David at Ziglag (i Ch. 12'-"); of priests, Le-
vites, musicians, and gate-keepers who took part in the removal of
the ark (i Ch. 15-16^); of princes, Levites, and priests sent through-
out the land to give instruction in the law (2 Ch. 17' <■); of captains
(Levites) who conspired to place Joash on the throne (2 Ch. 23');
of heads of the children of Ephraim who commanded the return of
PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE 9
the captives of Judah in the reign of Ahaz (2 Ch. 28'^); of Levites
who assisted Hezekiah in cleansing the Temple (2 Ch. 29'2-'<); of
superintendents of offerings (Levites), also in the reign of Heze-
kiah (2 Ch. 3 1 '2 '•); of overseers of the repair of the Temple, and of
rulers of the Temple (all Levites) under Josiah (2 Ch. 34'^ 358 ' ).
The history is thus throughout of the character of the Priests'
Code, both in its subject-matter and form of presentation, and is
written entirely from the point of view of that legislation and thus
as a supplement to i and 2 S. and i and 2 K. The priestly history
of Israel of the earlier books ceases with the concluding stories of
the Book of Judges. Samuel and Kings, while witnessing to
a few examples of priestly revision, convey no picture of Israel's
history as it should have been had the priestly legislation origi-
nated with Moses and been upheld and carried forward by the
pious David and his godly successors. To remedy this defect was
clearly the object of the Chronicler. He thus introduced a great
deal of new material, mentioned above, concerning the Temple and
its ministry and religious celebrations. But he was not simply
concerned with institutions and ceremonies and Levitical classes;
he was equally interested in the divine rule. He interpreted
Israel's life, after the pattern in the Priests' Code of its national
beginning under Moses, as that of a church with constant rewards
;:nd punishments through signal divine intervention. This method
had already in some measure been pursued, with Deuteronomy
as a standard, in the earlier histories. The Chronicler, with the
Priests' Code as his standard, aiming to give a more complete and
consistent history, while drawing largely as a basis upon Samuel
and Kings, modified their narratives. He made more universal
the connection between piety and prosperity, and wickedness
and adversity, heightening good and bad characters and their re-
wards and punishments, or creating them according to the exigen-
cies of the occasion. Thus grandeur is added to David by lists of
warriors who came to him at Ziglag and of hosts who made him
king at Hebron. On the other hand, his domestic troubles, his
adultery, and the rebellion of Absalom are passed over in silence.
The history of Solomon is similarly treated. No mention is
made of the intrigue by which he came to the throne, or of his
lO CHRONICLES
idolatries or troubles near the close of his life. After the disrup-
tion no mention is made of the N. kingdom except incidentally.
Its history is entirely ignored as that of an apostate or heathen
nation.
Rehoboam, of whom nothing commendable is written in Kings,
is approved and exalted in the early years of his reign (2 Ch. 11),
clearly that he as well as his people may stand in sharp con-
trast to Jeroboam and the northern tribes; and then later in ex-
planation of the invasion of Shishak, he is accused, with all his
people, of having forsaken the law of Yahweh (2 Ch. 12'').
Abijah, of whom in Kings only evil is recorded and whose brief
reign of three years is absolutely colourless save in the mention of
war between him and Jeroboam, is also transformed and exalted
after the manner of Rehoboam, and is not only given a great vic-
tory over Jeroboam, but made a preacher of the righteousness of
the Priests' Code (2 Ch. 13).
Asa according to Kings was a good king, and he removed idols
and an abominable image made by the queen-mother, but it is said
"the high places were not taken away." The Chronicler, how-
ever, makes him at first the remover of high places, and gives him
a mighty army and a victory over a Cushite host of 1,000,000 men
of which the earHer narrative knows nothing (2 Ch. 14'-'=). Later
the Chronicler quotes the passage concerning the high places but
applies it to Israel, the N. kingdom, over which Asa had no control.
Asa, according to the earlier narrative, invoked the aid of Syria
against Baasha, King of Israel. This act is made the subject of
prophetic rebuke, and Asa, from then on, is painted in dark colours
as the oppressor of the prophet and the people. This wickedness,
doubtless, was designed to be connected with his diseased feet
mentioned in Kings. The Chronicler also adds that he sought, in
his disease, not the Lord but physicians.
Jehoshaphat is commended in Kings for doing "that which was
right in the eyes of Yahweh" (i K. 22"), but the record of his reign
is very brief. This gave the Chronicler a full opportunity, and
hence, although Jehoshaphat is rebuked for his alliance with Ahab
(an alliance mentioned in Kings), and the wreck of his merchant-
vessels built in conjunction with Ahaziah, King of Israel (also men-
PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE II
tioned in Kings), is declared to be a punishment for the sin of such
a partnership, he is yet exalted exceedingly. He is endowed with
riches and honour in abundance. His army is very great, although
apparently entirely superfluous, since a divine interposition of
panic and self-destruction destroys an immense host of invaders
from eastern Palestine (2 Ch. 20). But the name of the King
seems to have suggested the special form of his good works.
Jehoshaphat means "Yahweh judges,''' and to him are assigned
the commendable acts of sending teachers of the law throughout
the land and the appointment of judges (2 Ch. 17' ^- 19' "■).
Joram, who according to Kings did that which was evil, is mag-
nified in wickedness and disaster. In his reign Edom revolted
from Judah, and the Chronicler connected this, as the older nar-
rative did not, directly with Joram's sins. Moreover, he also saw
in Joram a seducer of his own people, and threatened him with
fearful plagues through a letter from Elijah, who, according to
the older narrative, had already died in the reign of Jehoshaphat.
These plagues befall the monarch through a sack of Jerusalem
by a horde of Philistines and Arabians, and a fearful incurable
disease whereby the King's bowels fell out (2 Ch. 21).
After the death of Ahaziah, who reigned only a year, Athaliah the
queen-mother seized the throne, until at the end of six years she was
deposed and slain through a conspiracy directed by Jehoiada the
priest, and Joash was crowned. This conspiracy gave the Chron-
icler the opportunity to make one of his most marked reconstruc-
tions of history. According to the earlier narrative the conspira-
tors are captains of the royal mercenary body-guards; according to
the Chronicler they are captains of Levites, and the whole narra-
tive is rewritten in the interest of the exaltation of the Levites and
the preservation of the sanctity of the Temple (2 Ch. 23). The
reign of Joash was unfortunate in the extreme. He suffered the
loss of all the treasures of the Temple and of the palace in pur-
chasing the withdrawal of Hazael, King of Damascus, from Judah,
and later he was assassinated. The Chronicler tells how he de-
served this fate. He makes him, after the death of Jehoiada the
priest, an apostate from the worship of Yahweh and the murderer
of the son of his old benefactor the priest. He adds also to his
12 CHRONICLES
calamities by stating that at the time of his death he suffered
great diseases (2 Ch. 24).
Amaziah waged a most disastrous war with Joash, King of
Israel. The wall of Jerusalem was broken down and the treasures
of Temple and palace taken. Amaziah also met his death through
a conspiracy. These dire events needed an explanation and the
Chronicler introduces an apostasy of Amaziah in the worship of
Edomitic gods and threatens him through a prophet with de-
struction (2 Ch. 25"«).
Uzziah, one of the best (2 K. 15') and most prosperous of the
kings of Judah, became a leper and made his son Jotham regent.
The Chronicler finds a cause for this leprosy in a usurpation of
priestly prerogative in the burning of incense in the Temple, and
he says, "The leprosy broke forth in his forehead before the priests
in the house of Yahweh beside the altar of incense '' (2 Ch. 26").
Ahaz was not a good king, and to deliver himself from the com-
bined forces of Syria and Israel he successfully invoked the aid of
Assyria and seems to have suffered no great loss (2 K. 16). But not
so did the Chronicler write his history. He delivers him into the
hand of the King of Syria with a very great loss in captives; and
also into the hand of the King of Israel with the slaughter of 120,-
000 men in one day and the capture of 200,000 wives, sons, and
daughters. Edomites and PhiHstines also invade his land and the
King of Assyria distresses him (2 Ch. 285^).
Hezekiah was a good king and in the older narrative he re-
formed the worship of Yahweh and departed not from the divine
commandments. The Chronicler accordingly magnifies at length
his conduct, giving great prominence to the priests and Levites
(2 Ch. 29). But Manasseh his son was an exceedingly wicked
king, and he reigned the unusual period of fifty-five years. The
Chronicler explains this anomaly by a repentance of Manasseh
after an imprisonment, of which the older narrative knows
nothing, in Babylon (2 Ch. 33'^°).
Josiah was a good king and reformed the worship of Yahweh.
As in the case of Hezekiah, the Chronicler magnifies this element of
his reign, but Josiah met an untimely death at the battle of Me-
giddo. This required explanation, and hence it is recorded that
PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE 13
he was disobedient to a warning given by Necho from the mouth
ot God (2 Ch. 35^").
The Chronicler introduces on critical occasions warning and
exhorting seers or prophets. At the invasion of Shishak, Shem-
aiah addresses Rehoboam (2 Ch. 12'); at the overthrow of Zerah,
Azariah exhorts Asa (2 Ch. 15'^ ), and when Asa invokes foreign
aid Hanani reproves him (2 Ch. 16' " ); and Hanani's son Jehu like-
wise reproves Jehoshaphat for his alliance with Ahab, and Jehaziel
encourages Jehoshaphat in the conflict with Moab and Ammon
(2 Ch. 20'' <^), and Eliezer prophesies against Jehoshaphat for
his partnership with Ahaziah (2 Ch. 20"); Zechariah the son of
Jehoiada the priest testifies against the people in the days of
Joash (2 Ch. 24"); and Oded speaks unto the men of Israel in the
reign of Ahaz (2 Ch. 28'"). A few of these are mentioned in the
earlier books but are unknown on these occasions or with such
edifying speeches. They are clearly supplements by the later
writer.
In many minute particulars the earlier accounts are glossed or
revised. Of Saul's death it is added that he died for his trespass
and because he asked counsel of one having a familiar spirit
(i Ch. 10''). The statement that David and his men carried off
the idols of the Philistines (2 S. 5^') is changed to that of their
destruction by fire at the command of David (i Ch. 14"^). Noth-
ing less, evidently, was regarded as suitable for such abominations
from such a pious king. The ark entrusted to the care of Obed-
edom does not remain in the house of Obed-edom (2 S. 6'='), but
with this household in its own house (i Ch. 13'^). This would
keep it from defilement. Both Samuel the Ephraimite (i S. i')
and Obed-edom the Gittite (2 S. 6"") are given a Levitical
descent (i Ch. 6 '^^ <"« ' i6'« 26^^) as required of the servants of
the tabernacle and the ark in P.
Goliath the Gittite slain by Elhanan the Bethlehemite (2 S. 21")
becomes Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite (i Ch. 20').
This removes the discrepancy with the story of David's conquest
(i S. 17). David's sons are changed from "priests" (2 S. 8") into
"the first at the hand of the king" (i Ch. i8'0. A non-Levitical
priesthood supported by David was unthinkable to the Chronicler.
T4 CHRONICLES
Yahweh. who led David to number Israel (2 S. 24'), since a direct
divine temptation was not agreeable to the later theology, becomes
Satan (i Ch. 21'); and agreeably to the later angelology the de-
stroying angel is placed between the earth and the heaven (i Ch.
21") instead of remaining simply by the threshing-floor of Oman
the Jebusite (2 S. 24'^). The price paid by David for the threshing-
floor is changed from fifty shekels of silver (2 S. 24") into six hun-
dred shekels of gold (i Ch. 21"), since, forsooth, the former sum
was too paltry to be given by such a monarch as David for the
future site of the Temple. Fire also is said to have fallen from
heaven and kindled David's sacrifice, and also Solomon's, at the
dedication of the Temple (i Ch. 2i=« 2 Ch. 7'). This is a mark
of the later wonder-seeking theology. The high place at Gibeon
where Solomon sacrificed is explained as the seat of the brazen
altar and the tabernacle (2 Ch. i'-^), particulars une.xpressed in the
parallel narrative in i K. (3^). Thus the act of Solomon is kept
within the priestly law. The gift of cities by Solomon to Hiram,
King of Tyre (i K. g'" » ), becomes, to preserve, doubtless, the in-
tegrity of the Holy Land, the reverse — a gift of cities by Hiram to
Solomon (2 Ch. 8' ' ). The removal of Pharaoh's daughter from
the city of David into her house newly built by Solomon (i K. 9")
is motived because the place in proximity to the ark must be kept
holy (2 Ch. 8"). These striking glosses and changes by no means
exhaust the number made by the Chronicler. Wherever he makes
use of the earlier canonical narratives they are present in a greater
or less degree.
Thus the entire history of the kingdom of Judah has suffered
reconstruction, and it is clear that the Books of Chronicles are a
tendency writing of little historical value. The picture which they
give of the past is far less, accurate or trustworthy than that of the
earlier Biblical writings; indeed, it is a distorted picture in the in-
terest of the later institutions of post-exilic Judaism; and the main
historical value of these books consists in their reflection of the
notions of that period. Yet at the same time some ancient facts,
having trickled down through oral or written tradition, are doubt-
less preser\'ed in the amplifications and embellishments of the
Chronicler. These we shall have occasion to point out in our
PLAN, PURPOSE, AND HISTORICAL VALUE 15
commentary. They are few indeed compared with the products
oi the imagination, and must be sifted like kernels of wheat from a
mass of chaff {cf. S. A. Cooke, Notes on OT. History, p. 67).
The following new material, exclusive of names and notices in the
genealogical section, i Ch. 1-9, has been presented by Kittel, by the use
of heavy type, in his commentary as historical: (i) the additions to the
list of David's heroes (i Ch. ii"''-!?); (2) the family of Rehoboam
(2 Ch. ii'8-"); (3) the name of the father of the mother of Abijah (2 Ch.
13'); (4) the number of Abijah's wives and children (2 Ch. 13"); (s)
the teaching delegation sent by Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. i7'-0; (6) details of
the military might and building operations of Uzziah (2 Ch. 26»-'»
«-i2. 14 (.); (7) the same of Jotham (2 Ch. 27^^.^.^ y. « in part only); (8) the
invasion of the Edomites and Philistines in the reign of Ahaz (2 Ch.
28'" ); (9) the conduit built by Hezekiah (2 Ch. 323°='); (10) the place
of Hezekiah's grave (2 Ch. 32"b); (n) the enlargement of the wall
of Jerusalem by Manasseh (2 Ch. t,^,^^). Of these (4) and (5) are
probably of no historic worth; others are doubtful; some may be ac-
cepted, especially (6)-(ii). (See the commentary in locis.) Genuine
history has also been found in these additions of the Chronicler: (i)
Abijah's victory (2 Ch. 13'-"); (2) Asa's victory (2 Ch. 148" (s-it));
(3) Jehoshaphat's victory (2 Ch. 20' -3°); (4) Uzziah's resistance to the
priests (2 Ch. 26"'-"); and (5) the repentance of Manasseh (2 Ch. 33"").
The ground urged for this, as far as the victories are concerned, is that
the continued existence of the little kingdom of Judah for three hundred
and fifty years with enemies on the south and revolted Israel on the
north is hardly to be explained except on the hypothesis of some such suc-
cesses as the Chronicler describes (2 Ch. 13^^ i^saotr > 20'^), gained by
Judah (Ba. pp. xxx-xxxiii). This is a plausible but a specious argument.
The kingdom of Judah was too poor a country to be very attractive to its
neighbours or to entice distant hordes to make such invasions. Raids
may have been made into Judah and some reminiscences of these may
be behind these stories (see commentary), but nothing further can be
affirmed. The motive for (4) and (5) is so strong that no historical prob-
ability on the ground of their record can be asserted. A change of religious
policy by Manasseh in his old age, considering how his reign is viewed
by the prophets, is utterly unlikely. VVinckler, in connection with his
theory of the contact of the kingdoms of northern Arabia with Israel, has
found historical reminiscences in the Chronicler's allusions to the Meunim
(2 Ch. 26' I Ch. 4<' 2 Ch. 20' 05), the Arabians (2 Ch. 17" 21" i4><), and
the Hagrites (i Ch. s'" " 20). The basis for this inference is the claim
that the chronology of the appearance of these people in Ch. is correct.
They are mentioned just when historically they might be expected
(Musri, Meluhha, Ma'in, MVAG. 1898, pp. 42/.; KAT.^ pp. 142/,
l6 CHRONICLES
144). On the other hand it is strange that the older and more historical
Books of Samuel and Kings contain none of these notices or similar ones,
and it is readily credible that these names might have been current in
post-exilic times (if not certain that they were), and thus at hand for the
Chronicler to introduce as the enemies of Israel (We. Prol. p. 208;
Noeldeke, EBi. I. col. 274).
§ 5. THE RELIGIOUS VALUE.
The religious value of Chronicles lies in the emphasis given to
the institutional forms of religion. Forms, ceremonies, institu-
tions of one sort or another, are necessary for the maintenance of
religious life. The Chronicler, it is true, overemphasised their
importance and his teachings are vitiated by a false doctrine of
divine interference without human endeavour, and a false notion of
righteousness consisting largely in the observance of legal forms
and ceremonies. Yet in his own time, unless he had been a direct
forerunner of Christ, he could not have been expected to give
a different message, and in his day his message rendered a most
important service. He belonged not only to the same school of
writers as the author or authors of the Priestly element of the Pen-
tateuch, but was kindred with the prophets Haggai and Zechariah,
and especially Malachi. "The course of events since the restora-
tion had made the Temple with its high priest and its sacrificial
system a centre for the community much more than it had been
before, but this very fact had a providential significance in view of
the future. It was essential for Israel's preservation that the
ceremonial obligations laid upon it should be strictly observed,
and that it should hold itself aloof socially from its heathen neigh-
bours" (Dr. Minor Prophets, II. in NCB. p. 297). However nar-
row the Chronicler's teachings maybe considered and however arti-
ficial their products, without the shell of the Judaistic legalism and
ecclesiasticism it is difficult to see how the precious truths of divine
revelation in Hebrew prophecy could have been preserved. Other-
wise amid the encroaching forces of the Persian, Greek, and Ro-
man civilisations they would have been dissipated and no place
would have been prepared for the appearance of Christ and the
growth of Christianity. The work of the Chronicler fostered the
SOURCES 17
needed spirit of Jewish exclusiveness in its list of genealogies; it en-
hanced Jerusalem as the rallying-point and centre of Jewish life; it
favoured the maintenance of a hierarchy and emphasised the out-
ward forms of religion in sacrifices and national festivals, but all
this contributed largely to the religious solidarity and strength of
the people and gave them a tough quality.
Through these writings the past also was idealised and glorified
as a norm for present activity and future development. Nothing
better than the authority of the past could have served in those days
to intensify the loyalty and devotion of the ancient Jew. The divine
law of retribution and special providence, which the Chronicler
taught, was a most powerful factor also for preserving the Jewish
Church. It must also never be forgotten that it was under the
tutelage of men like the Chroracler that the Maccabees were nour-
ished and that the heroic age of Judaism was inaugurated.
§ 6. SOURCES.
A. The source of canonical material. According to the
sketch just given the Chronicler supplemented and in a measure
revised the history o*" Israel narrated in the canonical books, es-
pecially I and 2 S. and i and 2 K. These then constitute a main
source of his work. The following are the parallels between his
and the earlier writings. (These parallels include the Chronicler's
modifications of the canonical material and hence are not as re-
stricted as some lists which omit all observations and additions of
the Chronicler. For these details see commentary.)
:h. I'-^
Gn.
53-32 IQl.
" 1^^-23,
((
IQi-*- 6-8. 13-18a. 22-29^
" 1=^-",
((
II10-26, cf. 175. .
" 1=8-34,
It
2[-12-16a. 1-4. 13-26 ff iQli 212'-.
" 135-51,
it
•3g4. 5a. 10-14. 20-28. 3l-43_
" 2' -2.
3522b-26 Ex. I'-" and elsewhere
tt
382-v. 29f. 4612--' Nu. 26'3 '..
" 25,
tt
46'2'' Nu. 26" Ru. 4'8.
" 2''-\
Tos
7- I K. 5" (4'')-
« 29-•^
Ru.
4l'J-22 I S. 166-9 2 S. 2'8 1726.
i8
T AND 2 CHRONICLES
I Ch. 3'-»,
4 I
" <28-33
" 5'.
" r25. 56
" 51-4. 7 (16-19. 22)
" 67-13 (22-28")
«< 6"-^' (M-sn
" 9'->7%
" 101-12,
" iii-^
" jjlO-47
" 13'-".
" 141-7- 8-17^
" 17.
" 18,
" 19.
" 20'-»,
" 20<-',
" 21,
2 Ch. i6->3,
" T14-17
■*■ »
" II&-2I7 (2),
" -l_rl
J i> >
" 5^7'°.
" 711-22
929-3.,
lo'-iiS
122- 3. 9-lG,
13.. 2. 22. 23 (i^,),
I4I. 2 (2. 3>, 15' = -'%
16I.6. 11-14,
182-3^
20"-2l',
2i5-10. 20
221-6. 7-9,
2210-2321,
24I-U. 23-27^
2^1-4. 11. 17-28,
2 s. 32-5 s'- "■", cf. i3t.
I and 2 K.
Gn. 461" Ex. 615 Nu. 261-^ '•.
Jos. 192-8.
Gn. 46' Nu. 265 '•.
cf. 2 K. 1513 '■ 29 i7« 18".
Ex. 6l«- 18- 20. 23 Nu. 317- 19.
" 6"-**.
" 62< I S. I' 82.
Jos. 2I"'-"- S-9 20-39.
Ne. iii-i9^
1 S. 31.
2 S. 5'-3- s-io.
238-39.
6i-'i.
-11-16. 17-25
K
5'
612-23.
10.
Ill 1226-51.
21I8-22.
24.
34.I6,
I026-29.
el6-30 (1-15),
6, 713-5'.
101-13. U-JS.
I 141-43.
121-2'-.
1421-31.
151 2. 7. 8.
1511-18.
1517.24.
22S-3S.
2241-ei (SO).
2 K. 8i'-2«.
82i-29 Q16-28 10I2-4
II (II1-20).
I2I-I7. (ll21-I2"'^ T2l8-!»(W-21).
J .1-14. 17-20.
(
SOURCES
2Ch.
261-4. 21-23,
1421. 22 152-7.
u
271-3. 7-9,
JC33-36. 38_
281-4- 26. 27^
l62-l. 19. 20.
29' =,
i82- ».
32.-2,,
l8'3-I937.
3224.33,
20.
331-10. 20-25,
2jl-9. 18-21_
34' '■ '■'',
22, 23I-3.
35.. 18-24. 26.
" 36
1-4 **
2^21-23. 28. 29-34_
355. 6. 8-12,
2736. 37 24'. 6. 6. S-19
3622. 23,
Ezr
jl-3a_
19
The simplest explanation of the parallels (and the true one
already assumed above and now universally accepted) is the direct
quotation or paraphrase of the canonical books by the Chronicler
and their modification by him, or, what amounts to the same thing,
by a forerunner whose work he copied (a view mentioned below
though not accepted).
The evidence for this direct use is very clear. It is seen in the verbal
agreements which appear in every parallel. (See commentary.) Cor-
ruptions in the earlier texts are also repeated in the later. Cf. in i Ch.
Vp.-i 10'°, mv^ ii'6, 2Dn 1414, 'n'^1 1710, -inx 1721, iri^as p -["^c^nN ('on)
18", ny ? 1913, DoScn 20'; in 2 Ch., 'ui hiddS and 'js S;r 4", o;'3 41',
The canonical text is also sometimes so closely followed as to introduce
irrelevant expressions. Cf. i Ch. 6'"° (") 555b (70b) (but present form
possibly due to transcriber, v. in loco) 14^ ("ii>') 15-' 20' (now David
was abiding in J.) 20^ (the staff, etc.). The variations also between the
two texts show the dependence of one upon the other. Chronicles, as
might be expected from its less frequent transcription, in many instances
preserves the more original reading (cf. i Ch. i^- " 2" S^s- 34 jqi- 3. 4. 7
Ilia. 29 136. 8. 9 f. J47 jniS;?3, 12. 16 J7I2 f. 21 i8'-ll- 17 199. 18 206 2 Ch. 2" "8)
41''). An antiquated term is often replaced by a later one (cf. i Ch. lo'^
138 1529 ? 19! 2i2- 2. 4).
Statements jarring the Chronicler's sense of religious propriety or doing
violence to his conception of the course of history were omitted or
modified (see § 4, pp. 9-15).
Other departures from the text are such as might be expected from one
who was not a servile copyist. The Chronicler abridges frequently
(c/. I Ch. I'-"- 24-"- 34-42 23-4 3 Ch. i^"" ^^-y^- 16-17 71-3361-11), and occasion-
ally introduces words to emphasise an idea or to give clearness, and also
pious phrases (cf. i Ch. ii^ 1526 iS^. 13 2 Ch. iS").
20 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
This direct use, however, was formerly questioned, because the
variance between the parallels seemed destructive to the infallible
inspiration of the Chronicler. Hence arose the theory (held by
many commentators, and represented in its final and most perfect
form especially by Keil) that the Chronicler and the writers of the
canonical books both used common sources, and that the parallels
were independent extracts from common sources, each made from
a point of view peculiar to itself (Keil, Intro. § 141).
To illustrate this view: In the account of Saul's death (2 S. 31 and
I Ch. 10) there is agreement almost word for word until the treatment of
the corpse of the King. The WTiter of i S. says: The Philistines cut off
his head, stripped off his armour and put his armour in the house of As-
taroth, and then fastened his body to the wall of Bethshean. The Chron-
icler says: They took his head and his armour and they put his armour
in the house of their gods and fastened his head in the temple of Dagon.
The original source of both of these accounts Keil held must have con-
tained an account of both head and trunk, which the author of i S. followed
as far as the trunk was concerned and the Chronicler as far as the head.
Again in comparing 2 Ch. 2 with i K. 5'=-'- 'i-is)^ in the former we read
that when Solomon purposed to build the Temple he sent to Hiram, King
of Tyre, and asked for a cunning workman and for timber and hewers of
timber, promising much grain and wine and oil in return, while in i K.
only timber and cutters of timber are requested and no promise of oil
is mentioned. Here again Keil held that these are extracts from a
common source, one writer emphasising one particular and the other
another.
This supposition of Keil (an unnatural one compared with that
of direct use and really not worthy of further consideration) breaks
dowTi completely if the results of recent scholarship in reference to
the sources of the canonical books can at all be trusted, since these
sources always appear in Chronicles in the same combinations in
which they are found in the canonical books, and never apparently
otherwise; i.e., they appear always edited and not in their original
form.
The names in i Ch. i5=3 are grouped as they appear in Gn. lo-"-
^■-', a combination of three sources, P, J, and R (Dr. Gn.). Gleanings
from Gn. 35, 38, 46 representing P, J, and R appear in i Ch. 2. (No one,
however, has ever seriously argued that the Chronicler had access to the
sources of the Pentateuch, since, forsooth, to Keil and those of his
school the Pentateuch had no sources in the modern sense.)
SOURCES 21
In I Ch. i8 II 2 S. 8 is a combination of three sources. Glosses in
2 S. 5' ~^ 23'^ (Budde, SBOT.) are reproduced in i Ch. ii* 's. The
parallels with 2 S., however, are not favourable for presenting combina-
tions because underlying 2 S. is almost entirely a single source. In i
and 2 K. it is different, and here, following the analysis of Stade and
Schwally {SBOT.), a number of sources appear combined in nearly
every parallel in 2 Ch. In i^-'^ || i K. 3'-'5 three; in in-'? || i K.
I026-39 three; in c. 2 || i K. s's-'o "-•6) two; in 31-5' || i K. 6, 7'3-5'
three; in 5^7'" Ij i K. 8 three; in g'-^s || i K. lo'-^s two; in io'-ii< ||
I K. 1 2" -2' four; and thus in a similar manner throughout the entire list
of parallels. (The analyses of Ki., Kau., Sk., give a similar result.)
The Chronicler then used our present canonical books and not
their sources for all matter common to both works. He might still,
however, have used their sources for material not found in the
canonical books, but of this there is not the slightest evidence and
in form all new material (excluding genealogical matter and the
list of David's additional heroes, i Ch. n^ib-^?) jg of the compo-
sition or style of the Chronicler.
B. Sources ALLEGED BY THE Chronicler. After the manner
of the author of i and 2 K., the Chronicler refers to written sources.
These are of two classes; first, those with general titles: (a) A Book
of the Kings of Israel and Judah, for the reigns of Jotham, Josiah,
and Jehoiakim (2 Ch. 27' 35" 368). (b) A Book of the Kings of
Judah and Israel, for the reigns of Asa, Amaziah, Ahaz, and Heze-
kiah {v. i. (o)) (2 Ch. 16" 25^6 28^6 ^2^^). (c) A Book of the Kings
of Israel, for genealogies (i Ch. 9') and the reigns of Jehoshaphat
(2 Ch. 20'^) (v. i. (m)) and Manasseh (2 Ch. ^s'')- (d) A Mid-
rash of the Book of the Kings, for the reign of Joash (2 Ch. 24").
Secondly, those with specific prophetic titles: (e) The history (lit.
words or acts, so also below) of Samuel the seer, (f) The history
of Nathan the prophet, (g) The history of Gad the seer. These
three are given for the reign of David (i Ch. 29"). (h) The
prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite. (i) The visions of Iddo the seer.
These two and also (f.) are given for the reign of Solomon (2 Ch.
9"). (j) The history of Shemaiah the prophet, (k) The history
of Iddo Ihe seer. These two are given for the reign of Rehoboam
(2 Ch. i2'5). (1) The Midrash of the prophet Iddo for the reign
of Abijah (2 Ch. 13"). (m) A history of the prophet Jehu which
22 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
is inserted in the Book of the Kings of Israel, for the reign of Jc-
hoshaphat (v. s. (c)). (n) A writing of Isaiah the prophet, for the
reign of Uzziah (2 Ch. 26"). (o) The vision of Isaiah the prophet
in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel, for the reign of
Hezekiah {v. s. (b)). (p) ? A history of the seers for particulars
concerning Manasseh (2 Ch. ;i:i^^).
Authorities thus are given for the history of all the kings of
Judah except Jehoram, Ahaziah, Amon, Jehoiachin, and Zede-
kiah. (Naturally none are given for Athaliah and Jehoahaz.)
Also the following works are referred to : (q) A genealogical regis-
ter compiled in the day of Jotham and Jeroboam II (i Ch. 5").
(r) The later history of David? (i Ch. 23"). (s) The chronicles
(lit. words) of David in which the census taken by Joab was not
entered (i Ch. 27-^). (t) A collection of lamentations (2 Ch. 35").
The first three of these works (a) (b) (c) are generally allowed
to represent a single work whose full title was. The Book of the
Kings of Israel and Judah, or Judah and Israel, and the title
of which in (c) is abbreviated — Israel representing the entire
people and not specifically the N. kingdom, since under (c)
the reigns of Jehoshaphat and Manasseh are treated. This work,
which is cited as an authority for reigns as early as that of Asa and
as late as that of Jehoiakim, was clearly a comprehensive one, but
not the canonical Books of Kings, because it is cited for matters
not in those books — i.e., genealogies (i Ch. 9'), the wars of
Jotham (2 Ch. 27') and the prayer of Manasseh (2 Ch. t,;^^') and
the abominations of Jehoiakim (2 Ch. 36'). Neither was it the
sources mentioned in i and 2 K. for the political history of Israel
and Judah, since they were two distinct works. It may, however,
have been a work dependent upon those sources (Be. p. xl.; Graf,
GB. p. 192; Dr. EBi. I. col. 768, LOT.^^ p. 532), or since the real
historical material derived from this book apart from that in the
canonical books is extremely meagre it may have been dependent
upon those books, a Midrash or commentary on them (Kuenen,
Einl.-p. 160). In their earliest form i and 2 K. may have contained
fuller information than in their present Massoretic form. A war-
rant for this inference lies in the occasional fuller text of (g, which
implies an earlier, fuller Heb. text (Bu. Gesch. Altheh. Lit. p. 229).
SOURCES
Winckler gives the following genesis of Ch.: —
Pre-exilic chronicles of Israel and Judah.
Exilic, lost book of Kings. Midrash. Legends of Prophets. Midrash.
23
Canonical Book of
Kings.
Chronicles.
Musri, Meluhha, Main, MVAG. 1898, p. 42.
In reality no one can decide the exact basis of any unknown work.
Many and extensive volumes may lie before an author whose work is
restricted and meagre.
Whether the Midrash (e) was the same as this Book of Kings
is uncertain. The pecuHar title would suggest a distinct work
(so Be., Zoe., Oe., Ki.); on the other hand it is not apparent
why if, as its title shows, it was a comprehensive work dealing
with the kings generally, it should not be the same work as the one
just mentioned (so Ew. Hist. i. p. 187; We. Prol. p. 227; Francis
Brown, DB. I. P..395; Dr. (the probability) EBi. I. col. 768).
The word Midrash (amn 2 Ch. 13" 24" f from tfm to seek) in
Rabbinic literature denotes an exposition, an exegesis. This frequently
took the form of stories (such as those of Judith, Tobit, etc.), and the
probability is that the Midrash of Kings was a reconstructed history of
Israel embellished with marvellous tales of divine interposition and
prophetic activity, such as have been reproduced in Ch.
The prophetic writings (e) to (p) are not in all probability distinct
works, but are illustrations of the usual Jewish manner of citing
sections of comprehensive works. As in the NT. we read, "Have
ye not read in the Book of Moses in the place concerning the
Bush" (Mk. 1226), or more aptly, "Know ye not what the scripture
saith in Elijah" (Rom. ii^). The "histories" of Nathan, Gad, and
the others are then the sections of which Nathan, Gad, etc., were
the catchwords in the Book of Kings, i.e., the Midrash with the
possible exception of (n) where the reference is probably to the
Book of Isaiah (cc. 36-39), and also (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i), not
unlikely refer to sections of our canonical books {v. commentary).
This is proved first because the history of the prophet Jehu (m)
24 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
and the vision of Isaiah (o) are expressly mentioned as in this Book
of Kings, and secondly because the Chronicler never cites the au-
thority of the Book of Kings and the history of a prophet for any
one reign except where they are coupled together. The main
sources used by the Chronicler are then, in all likelihood, only two,
the canonical books and this Midrashic History of Israel, and if this
latter was dependent upon the canonical books then in reality he
had no really historical material apart from those books in their
original form (v. s.). Whether the Midrashic history contained
all his extra-canonical genealogical material, or whether he gath-
ered some from elsewhere through written or oral sources, it is im-
possible to determine.
It is also possible that the Chronicler has cited sources simply to
produce the impression that he is writing with authority, and that their
titles are mere literary adornments suggested by those in the Book of
Kings. This is essentially the view of Torrey, who, speaking of the
comprehensive work so generally held to have been used by the Chron-
icler, says, " It is time that scholars were done with this phantom
' source,' of which the internal evidence is absolutely lacking, and the
external evidence is limited to the Chronicler's transparent parading
of 'authorities'; while the evidence against it is overwhelming"
(AJSL. XXV. p. 195). The uniformity of the Chronicler's non-canon-
ical material certainly supports this view, yet at the same time it is
also phusiblc that the Chronicler may have had before him one or
more sources from which he derived subject-matter which he freely
composed in his own way. Certainly some of the new historical rem-
iniscences preserved in Chronicles were, in all probability, derived from
written sources.
Eliminating the canonical quotations, the remainder of Chroni-
cles is so marked and homogeneous in style that it has been
usually (and properly) treated as the work of a single author,
i.e., the Chronicler. (Thus We. Prol. p. 227; Dr. EBi. I. Art.
Chronicles; and especially Torrey, AJSL. xxv. Nos. 2, 3, 1909.)
In recent years, however, this remainder has been analysed
into sources. This presentation has such scholarly support that it
is worthy of statement, and throughout our commentary we give,
with criticism, its conclusions.
In an article published in 1899 (in ZAW.) Bvichler, a German scholar,
argued that our present i and 2 Ch. are a revised edition of a work that
SOURCES 25
originally made no distinction between the priests and the Levites.
This distinction he held was introduced later by the Chronicler, who
magnified the position of the Levites and brought in the Levitical musi-
cians. Under the influence apparently of Biichler's investigations,
Benzinger, in his commentary (appearing in 1901), presented also the
view that the Chronicler was much more an editor and mere compiler
than in any way an independent writer. This result was reached
through a study of the parallels with i and 2 S. and i and 2 K. Some
of these parallels agree essentially verbally with their source, others
show a considerable departure from the canonical text. These latter
are held to come not from the hand of the Chronicler but from a fore-
runner whose work he copied; and as the Chronicler was only in the
main a mere copyist in his treatment of the canonical writings, so like-
wise, it was inferred, must he have been in his treatment of his other
source or sources. Hence his work contains almost no original composi-
tion beyond inserted notices respecting Levites and musicians. (Movers
had presented in 1833 essentially this view, Untersuchungen,-pp. 163^.)
Thus in i Ch. 10-29 only cc. 23-27 are from the Chronicler. Of the re-
mainder, cc. ID, II, 13, 14, 17-19 are from S. Chapter 12 reveals no
special interest in anything Levitical; and c. 15 records six Levitical
families instead of the usual three and modest numbers, hence, except
a paragraph concerning Levitical singers (vv. """), both of these chap-
ters are not from the Chronicler; c. 12 coming from uncertain sources
and c. 15 from the work of a forerunner. Chapter 21 contains, with the
absence of a sufficient theological motive, too great departures from
2 S. to have been written by the Chronicler: hence it is from another
work, which appears continued in cc. 22, 28, 29. This work is ad-
mitted to be of the same vein and spirit of the Chronicler, showing an
interest in the religious cultus alleged to have been developed by David,
but is held to differ from the Chronicler's work: (i) in its more modest
presentation of contributions for the Temple, 29' -^ (to be compared with
22" 15, a paragraph owing to the great numbers assigned to the Chron-
icler); (2) in the Deuteronomic colouring and in the lack of interest in
P, since no objection is raised to David's sacrifice at the threshing-floor
of Oman.
In 2 Ch. 1-9, which presents a history of Solomon's reign, following,
with the single exception of a paragraph on Solomon's chariots and
horses, the order of i K., the departures from the canonical text
(2 Ch. 115-2'' (2i-'8)) are supposed to be too great to have come from
the Chronicler, since the Tyrian artist is Huram-Abi, instead of Hiram
(2 Ch. 2'2(>'" (see commentary), i K. 7'''), with his mother a Danite instead
of a widow from Naphtali (2 Ch. 2'3(i4) i K. 7"), and he is a worker not
simply in metals but weaving, etc., and the place Japho, unnamed in i K.,
is mentioned. Wanting also are the numbers of the workmen given in
26 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
I K. 5"'- <"'•> and the embassy from Hiram to Solomon (i K. 5').
The Deuteronomic reason for building the Temple, i.e., a dwelling-place,
is changed also into a priestly one, i.e., a place of worship (2 Ch. 2' " > i K.
5'9 »')■ In the description of the Temple and its furniture, owing again
to the variations from the account given in i K., the Chronicler is held
to have had another source before him, and in part is this held also of
the dedication.
The remainder of 2 Ch. (cc. 10-36) is assigned by Benzinger to different
sources, according to the character of the material. The Chronicler
throughout is a copyist. He only composes introductory and concluding
sentences and notices of the Levites. Kittel, in his commentary (1902),
accepts the theory of Benzinger and builds largely upon his conclusions.
He endeavours also to unify the various sources, and distinguishes (with
a variety of type and letters on the margin) the work of the Chronicler
and his predecessors. He warns one, however, against regarding the
conclusions thus expressed as final. He points out, by his mechanical
devices: (i) the material derived from the canonical books; (2)
material next in age of various sort and origin, yet mostly of historical
value (v. s. p. 15); (3) material from a Levitical writer, a forerunner of
the Chronicler, who wrote between 500 and 400 B.C.; (4) Midrash
material of two sorts (M and M=), taken in all likelihood from the cited
sources of the Chronicler; and finally (5) material of a period later than
the Chronicler, added by another Levite.
This theory of the composition of Chronicles, as we have said, rests
on the assumption that the Chronicler was essentially a mere copyist;
but even if at times he follows most closely his canonical sources there is
no reason why at other times he should not have been as free and
original as the Levite who is introduced as his forerunner. Exact con-
sistency is not necessary to the Oriental mind, and especially to a writer
like the Chronicler. A Deuteronomic colouring, along with a colouring
of the Priests' Code, implies no diversity of authorship, since every Jew
would be naturally versed in Deuteronomy as a people's book, one
probably read and studied far more by every pious Jew than the Priests'
Code, even by a Levite. Neither also, with a variety of traditions before
him, is there any reason why the same writer might not differently at
times enumerate Levitical families or statistics concerning the Temple.
The unity of style and composition, so individual and marked, already
mentioned, is against this patchwork theory of composition, although
its possibility in view of our limited knowledge cannot be denied.
PECULIARITIES OF DICTION 27
§ 7. PECULIARITIES OF DICTION.
In common with other late books of the OT., Ch. (including
Ezr.-Ne.) exhibits many peculiarities of phraseology and syntax.
Many old words are made to do service in new ways either rare or
unknown in the older language, and new words, the product of the
late religious organisation and view-point, appear frequently.
Also the incoming Aramaic, already a well-knowTi language, had
its influence on the Hebrew of the Chronicler, as is shown both by
the presence of Aramaic loan-words and by many common Ara-
maic constructions. The many peculiarities of syntax, which are
against the common usage of the earlier writers, indicate that the
compiler and author, who was bilingual, either used Hebrew with
some difficulty or that the language itself was decadent in his day.
In addition to its common late characteristics, this group of writ-
ings has marked peculiarities of style and vocabulary. Words and
phrases not found at all elsewhere are met frequently both in pas-
sages from older sources which have been worked over and, par-
ticularly, in additions bearing the certain marks of the compiler.
No OT. writer reveals himself more certainly. The reader feels
almost instinctively when he passes from an excerpt from an older
source to a paragraph by the compiler himself. Sentences are
often awkward and unnecessarily involved. The author's pet
phrases are introduced without stint and almost without fail on
every possible opportunity. No doubt many of the marks of
slovenly and careless composition which are so common are due to
copyists' errors (see § 8 Text), but so many of them are certainly
original that the compiler cannot be vindicated as a careful com-
poser. Probably not a few errors of his text which have been
ascribed to copyists were simply due to his own carelessness when
copying from his sources.
The following list contains the more marked peculiarities of the
Chronicler's writings, including new words and phrases, old ones
with a new or unusual sense, and syntactical usages peculiar to him,
and also all of these found frequently in other late books as well as
occasionally in earlier writings, but which are particular favourites
with the Chronicler, hence characteristic of his style. For con-
28 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
venience those found only in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. are marked with an
asterisk (*). It should l)e borne in mind, however, that words or
expressions marked rare or peculiar may have been common usage
in the Chronicler's day, this statement being due merely to our
meagre supply of literature of that period.
1. ''3X howbeit, hut, 2 Ch. i' 19' t,t,^' Ezr. 10", also Dn. 10" -' f- i^^
older Heb. with an asseverative force, verily, of a truth Gn. 42^'
2 S. 14' I K. I" 2 Iv- 4'^ and with slight adversative force, nay,
but Gn. 17" (P) to
2. niJ.N letter, 2 Ch. 30'- « Ne. 2'- «■ » 6*- i'- ■«, also Est. 9^6 "-^ f.
3. 7\'m^ possession, i Ch. 7-* 92 2 Ch. 11" 31' Ne. 11' and often in Ez.
and P.
4. -i^N promise or command, sq inf., i Ch. 21'" 27^ 2 Ch. i'* 14' 21'
2921. 27. 30 ^li. u 3521 Ne. 915, also 2 S. 24" 2 K. 8"' Dn. Est. and
elsewhere.
5' IJ^")?< * purple, 2 Ch. 2« t (a late form of i:p^3"!>f), cf. Aram. M^^unx
Dn. 5"- >« 29.
6. niS"jx lands, designating districts of Israel's territory i Ch. 13-
2 Ch. it^ 155 cf. Gn. 26'- ■•, including Israel's territory Ezr. 3'
(text dub.) 9'- ^ " Ne. io-»; in any sense pi. is almost wholly
late I Ch. 14" 22' 292° 2 Ch. g-^ 12* 13' 155 1710 20-" 32'3- •'• i'
34'' Ezr. 9^ Ne. g'^ 10", v. No. 91.
7. n:;u'N wrong-doing, guiltiness, i Ch. 21' 2 Ch. 24" 28"'- "■ "• "
TfT,"^ Ezr. 9*- '• "■ '^ 10'" '9 t, infreq. elsewhere.
8. Sna Niph. separate oneself (reflex, of Hiph.), i Ch. 12' Ezr. 6=' 9'
lo"- '« Ne. 9= 10", also Nu. 16=' (P) t; be separated * i Ch.
2313 Ezr. 10" t-
9. V''3. V? byssus, I Ch. 4^' 152' 2 Ch. 2'^ 3" 51=, also Est. i^ S'^ and Ez.
27'6 (where Cor. strikes out with (S) f-
10. nn 5/)oj7, ftooiy, 2 Ch. i4'3 25" 28'^ Ezr. 9" Ne. 3'*, also Dn. ii^' m
Est. 9'»- 15- 16 f.
11. (3) r^? * 5*z7/e£f, 5j!r77/€(f (in), i Ch. 15" 25'- « 2732 2 Ch. 26* 34121
(kindred meanings mostly late).
12. n^'3 (-a5//e, palace; of Temple, i Ch. 29' " t; of fortress near
Temple, Ne. 2* 72 f; Shushan iA« palace, Ne. i' Est. 1= s 33 5 3
315 8" 96- "• '2 Dn. 82 f.
13. ni'j-i"? * fortresses, 2 Ch. i7'2 27* f-
14. nVTN ri'3 fathers' houses, families, clans, i Ch. 4'* + 21 f. Ch.
Ezr. 2*3 lo's Ne. 7" lo^^, also often in P.
I.",. a^nSvsn n^a house of God i Ch. 6^^ 9"- '3- !« + 51 1. in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne.,
also of sanctuary at Shiloh Ju. i83'.
16. anna, ni — , * chosen, t Ch. 7" 922 i6^' Ne. 5>8 f-
PECULIARITIES OF DICTION 29
17. inj troop, of divisions of the army i Ch. 7' 2 Ch. 25'- '" i' 26", also
Jb. 2925 Mi. 4'''.
18. 7\BM * body, corpse, i Ch. 10'= f (late, cf. NH. and Aram.).
19. -wp * treasury, i Ch. 28" also 2820 (restored text) t {cf. NH.; a
loan-word from or through Persian).
20. cnjn common-land, suburbs, i Ch. 5"= 6" + 40 t. i Ch. 6, 13- 2 Ch.
ii» 31", also in Ez. and often in P.
21. ini Niph. hasten one's self, hurry, 2 Ch. 26=", also Est. 6'^ f, Qal
Est. 3'5 8'^ t (NH. fJ.).
22. a'ro^ii * drachma, Ezr. 269 = Ne. 7" Ne. 769- vi f; D^jb-i-'_!<,* i
Ch. 297, Ezr. 82' t-
23. nini uni ^ee^' Yahweh in prayer and worship, r Ch. 16" r=Ps.
105^) 283 2 Ch. i2» 143-6 1512 1612 229 26^; a^n'^N(n) 'i, 2 Ch.
193 265 3o"9; nin^S 'i i Ch. 22" 2 Ch. i5'3 20^ Ezr. 62'; D'hSnS 't
2 Ch. i7« 3121 343 Ezr. 42.
24. 5r">in * commentary, exposition, 2 Ch. 1322 242' f.
25- ^"!:P i^'?"!^ ^Jy/y adornment, only 2 Ch. 202" in prose, elsewhere in
poetry i Ch. 1629 = Ps. 96' Ps. 292 f.
26. i\n * how, I Ch. 1312, also Dn. lo'' f (an Aram. form).
27. nini('^) SSn * praise Yahweh, of technical Levitical function, i Ch.
i64. 36 235. 30 253 2 Ch. 515 13 2o'9 2930 3021 Ezr. 3"i- " 1' Ne. s'3,
cf. I Ch. 29" 2 Ch. 2021 t; SSn * abs. i Ch. 23= 2 Ch. 76 S'^
2313 2930 312 Ne. 1224 -j-^ .j^, No. 47.
28. \'^t::^ great number, 1 Ch. 29'6 2 Ch. 1123 3110^ also Je. 4932 f;
multitude, 2 Ch. 1123 (corrupt v. in loco) 13' 1419 202 '2. is. 24
32', also Dn. iii"- "• "• 12. 13 and freq. in Ez., but only excep-
tionally in early prose.
29. n kind, 2 Ch. i6», also Ps. i44'3. 13 f (also in B. Aram. Dn. 35- ?•
10. 15 +■)_
30. mr * Hiph. rejects (= earlier Qal), i Ch. 28' 2 Ch. ii'< 2919 f.
31. 1_>7 ^^ enraged 2 Ch. 26'9- 19 -|- (weaker in earlier usage).
32. |->;5TD refined, i Ch. 28' « 29^ also Is. 25^ Ps. 12' f-
33- nnj * come out, appear, of leprosy, 2 Ch. 26'9 f.
34. nnanp * binders, joints, i Ch. 223 2 Ch. 34" t-
35- ^r\} * Py' I Ch. i627 Ne. 8'°, Ezr. 6"! (Aram.) t (an Aram. word).
36. c'-^p month numbered not named, i Ch. i2'5 272- 3 .4. 5. 7. s. 9. 10. u.
12. 13 14. 15 2 Ch. 23 + 12 t. 2 Ch., Ezr. 3' + 10 t. Ezr., Ne. 7"
82 "4, also I K. 1232. 33 Je. i3 Ez. and oft. in P.
37' ^JP seer, i Ch. 2i9 (= 2 S. 24") 2929 2 Ch. 929 1215 ig2 2925 o^is. 19^
also 2 K. 1713 Is. 29"' 3010 (2S15 cf BDB.) Mi. 3? Am. 712, and
applied to singers * i Ch. 25^ 2 Ch. 293" 3515 -j-.
38. prnrn strengthen oneself, 2 Ch. i' i2'3 1321 158 (= take courage)
17' 2i4 23' 25" 276 Ezr. 728 (= gain strength, also t S. 30" 2 S.
30 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
3« I K. 20" Dn. lo's (= gain strength) f; sg. v.??' withstand, 2
Ch. 137- ' t; 3i' 5g. hold strongly with, i Ch. ii'» 2 Ch. le^*
also Dn. io=> f- (Use in earlier books, put forth strength, use
one's strength.)
39- ^P^]^ strength, of royal power, 2 Ch. i2t 26'8, also Dn. ii^ f.
40. nSh * te sick, 2 Ch. i6'2 f (usually n'^n).
41. D".'^nD * sickness, sufferings, 2 Ch. 242* f.
42. npSniD * division, course, technical term of organisation of priests
and Levites, i Ch. 23^ 24' 26'- 12. 19 271- '• =• 2. 4. 4. 4. s. e. 7. s.
9. 10. 11. 12. 13. U. 15 28'- 13. 21 2 Ch. 5" 8"- l< 23S 3l2- 2 16. 1«. 17
35<- '" Ezr. 618 (Aram.) Ne. ii^e f.
43« '!^'?n * ^oo£i works, pious acts, 2 Ch. 6" 32'' 3526 Ne. 13" f.
44* ^^7^^^ trumpet, as sacred instrument for use by priests only, i Ch.
138 1524. 28 166. 42 2 Ch. 512- 13 13I2. 14 2028 2926- 27. 28 Ezr. 310
Ne. 1255. 41 also 2 K. 12" Ps. 98^ and Nu. lo^- «■ 9. lo ^^e (^11
P) t; general use 2 K. iin n = 2 Ch. 2313 13 Ho. 5^ f; "'Xxn
* Pi. and Hiph. sound a trumpet, i Ch. 15=^ 2 Ch. 512 u 76
1314 2928 f.
45. '''y? n3''t3n iriSx-i'-p according to the good hand of my God upon me,
Ne. 28 Ezr. 79 Si' c/. Ne. 2I8; + nin^ Ezr. 728; om. njian,
Ezr. 76.
46. nn; Hiph. praise, of ritual worship, i Ch. 16^ '■ « 3<- 35. 41 2330
253 2913 2 Ch. 513 73- 6 2022 312 Ezr. 311 Ne. iii' 1221 "^ also
freq. in Ps. and rare in earlier writings v. No. 47; Hithp.
give thanks, in ritual worship, 2 Ch. 3022 f ; confess 'Ezr. iqi
Ne. 16 92- 3, also in P, H, and Dn.
47» ^h'^} nmn thank and praise, i Ch. i6^ 2330 253 2 Ch. 513 312
Ezr. 311 Ne. 122^ cf. i Ch. 29" 2 Ch. 76, v. Nos. 46, 27.
48. D113 01"' * day by day (= earlier 01'' ai'), i Ch. 1222 2 Ch. 813 24" 3021
Ezr. 3<- "• 69 (Aram.) Ne. 81s f.
49. rmnn * be enrolled by genealogy, i Ch. 433 51. ?■ 17 75. 7. 9. 4o g\. 22
2 Ch. 1215 31I6. 17. 18. 19 Ezr. 2" = Ne. 7" Ezr. 8i- ' Ne. 7* f.
t'n- genealogy, Ne. 7^ f.
50. nnSin generations, 1 Ch. 129 5? 72- 4. 9 828 qs 34 2631, also Ru. 4I8
and freq. in P.
51. JD^ * Hiph. use the right hand, i Ch. 122 f.
52. B-r; * aged, decrepit, 2 Ch. 361' f (</• K"^';, «^-. Jb. 1212 1510 298
32* t).
53- ^'7.^. * footstool, 2 Ch. 918 1 {cf. NH., id., step, stair; Aram., a rude
seat).
54. p?n 5e; up, prepare, i Ch. 932 1239 142 151 28? 2 Ch. 121 175 + 33 t.
Ch., and Ezr. 33; esp. with 2":^ set the heart, i Ch. 29I8 2 Ch.
1214 19- 2o33 3019 Ezr. 71".
PECULIARITIES OF DICTION 31
55. Dj: gatJier, Qal i Ch. 22= Ne. i2<< Ps. 33' Est. 4'^ Ec. 2^- 2^ 35 f.
56. ;'JJ Niph. be humbled, humble oneself, i Ch. 20' 2 Ch. 7'^ i2« '■ '•
12 1313 30" 32^6 3312- 19- 23. 23 2427. 27 3612 j^ also Lv. 26" (H) I S.
7'3 etc.; Hiph. humble, subdue, i Ch. ly'" iS' (= 2 S. 80 2 Ch.
28'9, also Ju. 423 Dt. 93 Is. 255 Jb. 40'= Ps. Si'^ lo;'^ f.
57. n^sD * bowl, I Ch. 28"- ''■ "■ " i'- " Ezr. i'»- 1° 8^' f-
58. VnipD * bemantled, i Ch. 15" f (</• B. Aram. N'j'an? Dn. 321)-
59. S'D-\? * crimson, carmine, 2 Ch. 2^ '^ ^h^ possibly also Ct. 7" for
Ssi3, f (a Persian loan-word).
60. 3.7? vn-iling, i Ch. 2819 2 Ch. 2'" 35^ Ezr. 2«2 = Ne. 7" Ezr. 4',
also Ez. 13S Dn. 10=1 Est. i" 312. u 4s gs. 9. 9. n 927 -j-.
61. na^lDT onS of row5 of shew-bread only, i Ch. 9^2 23-=* Ne. lo^^ f;
'rn jn'-c* i Ch. 2816 2 Ch. 29I8 f; '"• "^^lyo 2 Ch. 13" f;
T>pn'D 2 Ch. 2' t; '2 Lv. 24«- ' (P) f- (Earlier form was
D''J3n an':.)
62. y;'-; * Hiph. /e^^, 2 Ch. 3616 -j- (c/. nH. Hiph. f(f., ©and ^ Ethpa. /J.).
63. J>:^ Hiph. woc^, deride, always in bad sense, 2 Ch. 3o'<' Ne. 2'9 3^3,
also Jb. 2i3 Ps. 228 Pr. iS' (for M, V^iT^\ cf. BDB.) f {cf.
NH. id.).
64. -i^cS.T * 5c/w/ar, I Ch. 258 t (late and NH.).
65. nse;'? chamber, cell, of the rooms of the Temple, i Ch. g"^^- " 2328
2812 2 Ch. 31" Ezr. 829 io'5 Ne. iqss- 39. 4o 134. 6. s. 9 |^ also oft.
in Ez.; of room at high place i S. 9^2 and I's <S (accepted as
original We., Dr., Klo., Bu.) f- The word is used in the sense
of store-room only in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. Cf. ^p^h No. 77.
66. T nSd consecrate, i Ch. 29= 2 Ch. 139 i633 2931, also Ez. 4326 Ex.
28" 299- 29. 33. 35 3229 Lv. 833 1533 211 Nu. 33 (all P), and Ju.
175 12 I K. 1333.
67. maSa kingdom, sovereign power, i Ch. iii" + 27 t. Ch., Ezr. i«
45. 6. 6 71 81 Ne. 935 1222, also 26 t. Est., 16 t. Dn., Ex. 4'S 5 t. Ps.,
3 t. Je., and elsewhere. (In earlier writings usually ^^'^pn or
njiSp.)
68. Sjp commit a trespass, 1 Ch. 2^ 525 iqis 2 Ch. 122 2616 ^ 28'9 22
299 30' 36" Ezr. io2- '» Ne. i^ 13=7, also freq. in Ez. and P;
•j^a trespass, i Ch. 9' io'3 2 Ch. 28'9 2919 3310 36^ Ezr. 92- *
io«, also Dn. 9' Jb. 2i3^ and freq. in Ez. and P.
69. NSD Niph. be present, i Ch. 29" 2 Ch. 5" 2929 3021 311 3432, 33 357.
"• 13 Ezr. 825, also Est. i^ 4'6 and On. 1915 (J) i S. 1315- is 21^ f.
70. aijnr, offer free-will-offerings,* i Ch. 295- e. 9. 9. n. n. n y^-^t. i«
268 35 -j-; offer oneself, volunteer, 2 Ch. 171" Ne. 112, also Ju. '
52. 9 ■)-. {Cf. same in B. Aram. Ezr. 713- is. k- is •)-.)
71. fjj sheath, i Ch. 212?, also Dn. 7'=- (Aram.) f (NH. id.; a Persian
loan-word).
I AND 2 CHRONICLES
72. -ipn nipn hath extended loving-kinduess, Ezr. 728 9'.
73. D>p3: riches, 2 Ch. i"- '=, also Jos. 228 (P), Ec. 5'8 6= t (prob. an
Assy, or Aram, loan-word).
74- r}'^h ri??^ oversee, overseer, i Ch. 152' 23^ 2 Ch. 2'- '' 34'= "
Ezr. 3' ' I; also in the titles of 55 Pss. and in the title Hb. 3".
75. 2p_i Niph. te expressed by name, i Ch. 1222 16" 2 Ch. 28'5 3119 Ezr.
82", also Nu. I" (P) t-
76. .srj take as wife (usually with S), i Ch. 23" 2 Ch. ii='- -^ (.v.in/oca)
13=' 243 Ezr. g-- '2 10" Ne. 13", also Ru. i^. A late usage.
77. nrtt'j * chamber (a rare parallel of ^"v'7 5. i'. No. 65), Ne. 3=°
12-'* 13" t-
78. *;• i; jp: * submit, yield to, 2 Ch. 30^ f; rnn t\ p3 id., i Ch. 292*;
N'Xin'7 oy^ ]^]give their pledge to send away, Ezr. 10"; h 3^7 j.-^j
5^/ ;/;e /icar/ to do a thing, i Ch. 22" 2 Ch. ii'^, also Dn. lo'^
Ec. i'3- n 721 8'- •« f.
79. r:-yr: * Nethiiiim, i Ch. 92 Ezr. 2^3. ss. 70 = Ne. 7". eo. -2 g^^.
7V. 21 (Aram.) S"- 20. 20 JSfg. 326. 31 ^Qii jjS. 21 -[-_
80. Top * enumeration, census, 2 Ch. 2'6 -j-.
81. nnoj." service of God, i Ch. 6i' ^^ gu. is. 28 2321. 26. 2s. 23. 32 243- is
251- '• 6 268 2813- 13. 14. 14. 16. 20. 21. 21 29? 2 Ch. 8^ 128 24I2 29^5
31-- '^- -' 35-- '"• '^- '* Ne. io33 f, also oft. in Ez. and P.
82. Sip i';vn7 proclaim, 2 Ch. 30^ 3622 = Ezr. i', Ezr. lo^ Ne. 8'%
also Ex. 366 (P) f.
83- "*■!> * help, I Ch. 12^^- 2' t (text dub., r/. textual notes; if correct
Aram, loan-word).
84. -\}V help of divine assistance, i Ch. i2'8 1526 2 Ch. i4>'' '» iS^' 258
26' 328, also freq. in Ps., less freq. in earlier books; Niph. i Ch.
520 2 Ch. 2615.
85. TSy next to (in a series), 2 Ch. 1715- le- 18 3115 Ne. 32- 2 -}- 13 t.
Ne. 3, 1313, esp. late.
86. T^-S^, ^y-^V_ according to the guidance of, i Ch. 252 = s. e. e 2 Ch.
2318 2613 2927 Ezr. 3'°, also Je. s^' 3313.
87- ^'7"?'? * exceedingly, i Ch. 142 22^ 23" 293- 25 2 Ch. i' 1612 1712 20"
268 f.
88. i?y rise (for earlier Dip), i Ch. 20< 211 2 Ch. 2023 Ezr. 2" = Ne.
7« Ne. 85, also Est. 4" and freq. in Dn.
89. I'^VT" appoint, institute, establish (in earlier books station), i Ch.
616 1516. 17 16" (= Ps. 105")) 17" 222 2 Ch. 814 98 „i5. 22 195. 8
2o2i 2413 (f/. Ezr. 2«8) 255- n 305 312 338 352 Ezr. 38 Ne. 4' f 73
io33 1231 I ^11. 30^ also Dn. ii"- '3- '4; make a stand (in a covenant),
2 Ch. 3432.
90. ■^'^y Sy ipy stand on standing-place, 2 Ch. 30I6 3431 3510 Ne. 131",
Dn. 8'8 iQii -f-; with cip for t?V Ne. 93 f ; no verb Ne. 8- f.
PECULIARITIES OF DICTION 33
91. nii^.ifn 'Di' * peoples of the latids, 2 Ch. 13" 321- »' ('^"^ 'rO
Ezr 3' 91 2. u N,^ ^30 ;o2d, r -NTo '''
92. n3 -\x;- possess power, be able, i Ch. 29'^ 2 Ch 2^ i^"" 22', also Dn.
108. 16 116 -j-; om. nr 2 Ch. 1411 20" t-
93. 3;ii:n u-ei^, i Ch. 7" i2>« 2616- 's. so 2 Ch. 323" 1,1,^^ also Is. 47= 45'
59's Dn. S^ Ps. 75' 103'- 107' and /u. 20" (corrected text, cf.
Moore, Ju.) f.
94. TiaDi ir; r/t7;e5 a«t/ hoiwur, i Ch. 29'= ^s 2 Ch. i'- >2 17* 18' 32=',
also I K. 3'3, Pr. 3I6 S's Ec. 6^ f-
95. p'.-iy * ancient, i Ch. 422 f (an Aramaism, cf. Dn. 79- '3- =2).
96. '^y nini nno n^n the fear of Yahweh came upon, 2 Ch. 14" 17'°
197 20-9 (2^^'?x ins) f (elsewhere 'Ui '733).
97. ^3■) * set free from duty, i Ch. 9" 2 Ch. 23^ f.
98. 13"'? * some sort of open portico, i Ch. 26"= '" j (probably Persian
loan-word; cf. D^-inp 2 K. 23").
99. r\-;t-Q-z * hip or buttock, i Ch. 19^ (2 S. 10^ oninirr) f.
lOO. D:n'?X3 * cymbals, 1 Ch. 138 is'"- 's- =» i65- 42 251- ^ 2 Ch. s'2- '^
2925 Ezr. 31" Ne. 122' f-
ioi. 1>DS he-goat, 2 Ch. 2921 Ezr. 61' (Aram.) 8'=, also Dn. 8^ s. s. 21 -j-.
102. l"ii * need, 2 Ch. 2'^ f (Aram. word).
103. '^5P receive, take, accept, i Ch. 12'^ 21" 2 Ch. 29'6- 22 Ezr. 8", also
Pr. 192° Jb. 2'° 1" Est. 4^ 923 27 f (a common Aram, word, cf.
Dn. 26 6> 7's t).
104. nus 'rs-j /2eaJ5 of fathers' (houses), i Ch. 711 S^- lo- i3. 28 qq. 33. 34
1512 239- 21 245- 31 2621- 26. 32 27I 2 Ch. l2 198 232 2612 Ezr. l5 2"
312 42. 3 gi ioi= Ne. 7"- 70 8'3 II" i2'2 22. 23^ also Ex. 625 Nu. 3126
3228 36'- ' Jos. 14' 19^1 21' ' (all P) t; the phrase wita ro
expressed i Ch. s'^- 24. 21 72. 7. 9. 4o g,i3 241, also Ex. 6'< Nu. i*
72 i7'8 25"" Jos. 22'^; tr'NT (alone in same sense) i Ch. 57- '2
7' 828 _|_ and (appar. combined with the idea oi first in a series)
278. 11. 19. 20_
105. ai'^ abundantly, 1 Ch. 4^8 12" 223- s- <■ s. 8. h. is 292. 21 2 Ch. i'^ =
927 (= I K. 1027) 28 418 91. 9 ii23 14I4 159 168 lyS ig'- 2 2025 241'- 24
273 293s 3o5- 13- 24 316 325- 29 Ne. 92^, also Zc. 14".
106. 131., NUT tew thousand, myriad, 1 Ch. 297 7 Ezr. 2" = JNe. 7^6
Ezr. 2" Ne. 770 71^ also Ps. 68'8 Dn. ii" Ho. 8'2 Jon. 4" f-
107. tt'i3i property, goods, i Ch. 2731 28' 2 Ch. 202^ 21''' >7 353 3229 35'
Ezr. i^- « 821 iqs, also Dn. 11 '3 24. 28^ and Gn. 126 i3« 3i'8 36?
46« Nu. i632 353 (all P), and Gn. 14" 12. 16 le. 21 igi4 -j-.
108. 'J'^") Hiph. act wickedly, 2 Ch. 2o35 223 Ne. 933, also Jb. 3412 Ps.
106' Dn. 9^ ii32 12'" (i S. 14" corruption, cf. Sm. Sam.) ■\.
109. n'i'vij nnnt' great joy, i Ch. 29' 2 Ch. 3025 Ezr. 3''- " 622 Ne. 8"
I2'3, a common expression of the Ciiiunicler.
3
34 r AND 2 CHRONICLES
no. It;" * prince, chkj, tuler, ui religious office, i5-'- -• "■'' 2^^- ^ 2
Ch. 35' cf. I Ch. 155 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 (Is. 4328 corrupt), aud esp.
OVr*-^ 'T-^* * chiefs of the priests, 2 Ch. 36H Ezr. S^^- " iqs f.
111. i?;r-: * 5/«^er, i Ch. 6" 9" + 11 t. Ch., Ezr. 2"- «. 70 = Ng.
744. 67. 72 E2r. 7' io2< Ne. 7' + 12 t. Ne. f-
112. na^nr * act of slaying, 2 Ch. 30'" f-
113. n^r * Niph. 6c negligent, 2 Ch. 29" f-
114. rhz! weapon, 2 Ch. 23'" 32* Ne. 4'i- '?, also Jb. 33i« 36'^ Jo. 2' t;
sprout Ct. 4'^.
115. ^JV~^' /i^a'' ?«e (beginning a speech), t Ch. 282 2 Ch. 13' 15'
20-0 28" 29* t; <■/• Gn. 236 (hear us), w.'- "■ " '^ (all P).
116. a^^;"''"^;' * gate-keepers, of Temple, etc., a sacred function, i Ch.
9'" + 19 t. Ch., Ezr. 2"- '0 = Ne. 7"- " Ezr. ^^ id^* Ne. 7' + 7 t.
Ne. (also 2 S. 18=^ but corrupt for '^"J'^} and 2 K. 7"°- " but of
secular function).
Also the following list of syntactical peculiarities appear either
exclusively in Ch. (including Ezr.-Ne.) or are frequent else-
where only in late books.
117. Sentences are often abbreviated in a peculiar manner, producing
an awkward reading; a the subject omitted (where earlier
writers would not venture to do so), i Ch. 9^^'' 2 Ch. iS^ ^'"'
(i K. 22^ otherwise) 19^'' 35-'; b expressed without a verb,
I Ch. 1513* 2 Ch. ii^^b (?) 15' i6i=- 'S''- b 2ii5 26i8'> 28"'' 29'
3c' '"b. Cf. Ew. Syn. § 303 b.
118. The inf. cstr. is often used almost as a subst., i Ch. '^- "• '• *"
g^ 233' 2 Ch. 33 24'4 {cf. Ezr. 31') ^t,^^ Ezr. i" Ne. 12'^. Cf.
Ew. Lehrb. § 236 a.
IIQ. The art. n for the relative (derived from its demonstrative use),
I Ch. 2628 298- " 2 Ch. i« (r?.\i?) 293* Ezr. 8=5 lo'* '". This
use is very doubtful in early writings, viz. in Jos. 10=' i S. 9^'
{cf. Dr. Notes on Sam.). Cf. Ew. Sy7i. § 331 b, also foot-note
on p. 209, Koe. iii. § 52, Ges. § 138?.
120. The relative omitted (in prose almost entirely confined to Ch.-
Ezr.-Ne.), i Ch. 9-'' 12=' i5>='' 29' (but v. in loco) 3i> 2 Ch. 13^
(</• Je- 50 14'° {cf. Is. 40") 15" i69 20" 2411 289 29=' 3o'8'>-i9a
3i>"> Ezr. i5- 6 Ne. S'" 13=3. Cf. Ew. Syn. § 333 b, Ges. §
l?i. np in two strange idioms is almost equivalent to the relative
what, I Ch. i5'3 (nrrNiac'?) 2 Ch. 30^ (nc'?) f. See textual
note= on these pf'^sagjes.
i22. The relative r combined with the prep. 3, i en. 25' (v. i« /<)«)
27".
PECULIARITIES OF DICTION 35
123. The combination of two plural forms (contrary to better usage),
I Ch. 75- 7- "■ " etc., also No. 91 above. Cf. Zunz, Gottesd.
Vortrdge, p. 23.
124. Words repeated, often strengthened by Sj, to express the idea of
all considered distributively, i.e. every, as "ijjb'i i;^;', ^^ny1 ^^^^J?,
-i^yi -iv, 01^1 D^S I Ch. 26" 28'<- '^ 2 Ch. 8'^ ii>= 19^ 28^5
3i'9 322s 3413 3515 Ezr. 10" Ne. 13=', also Est. i^- 22- 22 g"- 12 3^-
12. 12. 12. 12. 14 43 89- 9- 11. 13. 17. 17 q21 . 27. 28 Pg. 45I8 87^ IJ^^^^.
125. Subordinate temporal and causal clauses are placed at the
beginning of the sentence (where in the earlier language either
they were introduced later, or, if placed at the beginning for
sake of greater prominence, "'nM was prefixed), i Ch. 21^' 2 Ch.
rl3 ^I J 2?. 12 I [-8 202"- 22. 23 22'' 24'''- 22b. 25 261^- 1''' 202'- 29 oil. 5
33'2 34H Ezr. 91- 3- 5 iqi, also Est. 91- 2 Dn. S^t. is lost. nb. 15. i9b
ii2. 4 ij^b. Cf. Dr. Notes on Sam., on i S. 17".
126. The inf. (with S prefixed) at the end of a sentence, i Ch. is'"-
19- 21 22* C7'i.?:'V) 255 2 Ch. 5" 223b 2519 (2 K. 141° otherwise)
3619 e»'i Ezr. 3 12.
Also prepositions in usages either new or mucn more fre-
quent than in earlier books.
127. ^ ly a strengthened form of "ly (in earlier writings either alone
would serve); before a subst. i Ch. 4^9 12^'- "' 232^ 28? 2 Ch.
1412 i6i2- 11 1712 268- 15 289 293" 3ii» 361s Ezr. 313 g*- « loi-i f;
before an inf. i Ch. 59 13^ 2820 2 Ch. 241° 268- 's 2928 311
3224 (2 K. 20' h alone) Ezr. lo", also Jos. 13^ Ju. 3' i K.
l829 f.
128. S as the sign of the ace. (from Aram, influence): a with certain
verbs (contrary to earlier usage), lyn-; frequently, hbn only in
Ch.-Ezr., Pin i Ch. 262' 2912, 1^2 i Ch. 2920 Ne. 112, Tin 2 Ch.
32I', also I Ch. 16" 186 251 2922- 22 2 Ch. 5" 6" 177 245 3413
Ezr. 8i'5; b at the end of an enumeration, i Ch. 28^^ 2 Ch.
2412b 2614'' 2823; c marking the definite object after an indefinite
I Ch. 2918 2 Ch. 212 23'; d after the sufifix of a verb (as in
Syriac) r Ch. 52^ 236 2 Ch. 255- 'o 2815, cf. Ne. 932; e defining
the suffix of a noun i Ch. f 2 Ch. 3116- is Ezr. 91 iqI'. Cf.
Ges. § 117H.
129. S with the inf., expressing tendency, intention, obligation (less
frcq. in earlier writings), i Ch. 63^ 925 ioi3 22^ 2 Ch. 2^ 8'3 1122
192 265 3121 3619 Ne. 8i3b; esp. after t'!* or nS it is not possible
{permitted) to, there is no need to, '^ |vv' i Ch. 2326 2 Ch. 5"
20« 229 3515 Ezr. gi5^ S N^ I Ch. 5' 152 2 Ch. i2'2Ezr. 6^ (Aram.)
Cf. Dav. Syn. § 95 b Ges. § 114/, Dr. TH. §§ 202-206.
36 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
130. ^3*7 as regards all, thai is all (in adding a summary or a further
specification), i Ch. 13' 2 Ch. 5'= 25' 28'^ 3i'« ^7," (so also 2 K.
21') Ezr. i'', also freq. in P. Cf. Ew. Syn. § 310 a. Also '^ of
"introduction," i Ch. 5= 7' 28'"''- =' 29«i> 2 Ch. 7-' (7 wanting in
I K. 9') Ezr. 728.
131. iDi'3 01''— >3i.7 (ii omitted in earlier language, cf. Ex. 5'-'), i Ch.
16" 2 Ch. 8'< 31'= t-
132. px*^ * without or so that not, i Ch. 22^ 2 Ch. 14'= 20^5 21'* 36'«
Ezr. 9" t-
133. ^"^"^ * without, 2 Ch. 15'- 3 3 -j-.
134- ^.?T> * 2 Ch. ii'2 168 Ne. s'8 1-
135. Si^.T a5 concerning, 2 Ch. 32'^, also Ps. 119" (used differently in
Is. 59'8 63O t-
136, 3 of accompaniment (without a verb), i Ch. 15" =" 21. 22 j^s
256* 2 Ch. 5'2» 76 1310 35" Ezr.
312b.
§ 8. HEBREW TEXT AND THE VERSIONS.
The Hebrew Text. — The text of Chronicles is in fair con-
dition, though by no means up to the standard of many of the older
Old Testament books. The late date of composition, together
with the fact that these books probably were less read, hence less
copied, than most of the Jewish Scriptures, would lead us to expect
a better text. The many lists of proper names, where the context
could not assist the scribe to the true reading, are responsible for a
large number of the textual errors, but the narrative portions also
are not free from serious corruptions showing that the text must
have been handled freely for a considerable time. The late recep-
tion of Chronicles into the OT. Canon (cf. Wildeboer, Origin of
the Canon of the OT. p. 152) allows for a considerable period of
such freedom. The Hebrew mss. contain few variants and these
involve largely only the Massoretic accentuation, and give little aid
for restoring the true text. Baer, in his edition of the text (Liber
Chronicorum), notes nineteen variations between the oriental
(Babylonian) and occidental (Palestinian) texts, only fourteen of
which concern the consonantal reading. Of these six are due to
the confusion of 1 and '», three to unimportant omissions of letters,
and the remainder are equally insignificant. In seven instances
the Qr. of the oriental text calls for the occidental reading.
HEBREW TEXT AND THE VERSIONS 37
In the case of those portions of Chronicles which are parallel to
the older canonical books the textual critic is particularly fortunate.
The text of the sources with their versions may be used in addition
to the versions of Chronicles as an aid for restoring the original text
of Chronicles, as vice versa Chronicles is often useful for the criti-
cism of the text of the older books, frequently preserving the orig-
inal reading {v. p. 19). These older books, however, must be
used with extreme caution for the purpose of emending the text of
Chronicles, since many changes are due to the intention of the
Chronicler. The text of the older books was already in a corrupt
state when the Chronicler used them as sources. Frequently he
made changes in the interest of better sense, doing the best he could
with a difScult or corrupt reading, and often he simply incorpo-
rated from his source an early corruption. The task of the textual
critic of Chronicles is not to restore the original source reading of
a given passage, but only to rewrite the text as nearly as possible as
it came from the hand of the Chronicler. The failure to observe
this principle has often caused confusion.
The Greek Versions. — The Greek version of the books of
Chronicles (commonly supposed to be the Septuagint rendering
of these books) is an extremely literal translation, belonging in this
regard in the same category with the Greek of Ezekiel, Canticles,
and Ecclesiastes. The Massoretic text is followed so closely that
there can be no doubt that its translator had our Hebrew recension
before him. We are not so well supplied with old Greek MSS. as in
the case of many Old Testament books, but we possess a complete
text of Chronicles in the uncials A (V century), B (IV century),
and N (VIII-IX centuries), and for i Ch. 9" to irpcoi to 19" S(IV
century) is also available. Numerous cursives (about thirty) dating
between the tenth and fifteenth centuries should be added to this
list, but how many of these have any independent value has not yet
been determined.
In addition to this ordinary Greek version, the first book of
Esdras, which begins with the translation of the last two chapters
of 2 Ch., is an important witness for obtaining the original text of
these chapters. This translation is much freer than the received
text and has a different Hebrew recension behind it. The book is
38 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
preserved in the uncials A, B, and N (except most of last chapter,
cf. Holmes and Parsons), but not in N; also in nearly thirty
cursives.
Before any critical use can be made of these two versions — for
they are distinct versions — their respective ages must be deter-
mined. That our received text of Ch. is really the translation of
Theodotion has been maintained by such scholars as Grotius
(1644), Whiston (1722), Pohlmann (1859), and Sir Henry Howorth
(1893, 1901-2), but the evidence has been set forth most convinc-
ingly by C. C. Torrey (see AJSL. vol. XXHI. pp. 121 ff., and
especially ATC. pp. 60 ff.). He maintains that i Esd. represents
the only extant remains of the real Septuagint of Ch.-Ezr.-Nc.,
and this was later supplanted by the version of Theodotion, whose
origin was soon forgotten and which was therefore accepted as the
true Septuagint. The argument has generally been that since our
Greek version bears the marks of late origin compared with the
version preserved in i Esd., and since Theodotion's translation
of Daniel supplanted the older translation, it is plausible to sup-
pose that the same thing has occurred here and our received text
is really the rendering of Theodotion. Torrey, in addition to this,
has collected much direct evidence that the received text is
Theodotion's, and this he states along the following lines {ATC.
pp. 60 ff.). (i) Theodotion's habit of transliterating words of
difhcult or uncertain meaning, and often without any apparent
reason, is one of his most striking characteristics {cf. Field, Hexa-
pla, I. pp. xxxix-xlii, also Swete, Introduction, p. 46) and this is
also the common practice of the translator of Ch.-Ezr.-Ne.
Seventy such words are listed and they appear regularly dis-
tributed throughout these books. Some of them are identical
with transliterations by Theodotion elsewhere. (2) Unusual
translations in the Theodotion rendering of Daniel are duplicated
in the Chronicler's books. (3) According to the custom of this
translator, gentilic names are transliterated exactly instead of
being given the Greek adjective ending, though these have often
been substituted later in the mss., especially in L. In view of
our meagre supply of extant passages from Theodotion's transla-
tion (Daniel being merely a revision of the old Greek), from which
HEBREW TEXT AND THE VERSIONS 39
his characteristics must be determined, this evidence is surprisingly
strong.
Moreover, evidence is not entirely lacking that the Greek ver-
sion of Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. current before the time of Theodotion and
apparently accepted as the Septuagint was not our "canonical"
version, but a somewhat free translation of a different Hebrew
recension and of which i Esd. formed a part. If our Greek was
the accepted Septuagint in the time of Josephus, it is not surprising
that he should have culled the story of the three youths from
I Esd. (Ani. xi. 3, 2-8 = 1 Esd. 3-4), since this story is wanting else-
where, but it is strange, as has frequently been noticed, that he
should have quoted in other places from i Esd. in preference to
the aiitlwritative Septuagint version. In Ant. xi. i, i. KOpo? 6
^acn\ev<i Xeyec 'Eirec fie 6 6eo<; 6 fie'ryiaro'i rr)? otKOv/xevri^
airehei^e jBacrikea^ . . . top vaov avrov otKoSofirjaco iv
l€po(To\v/xoL<i iv TTj 'lovBuia X^P^ follows closely the text of
I Esd. 22'- but cf. 2 Esd. i=, which we should e.xpect Josephus
to prefer. .So also Aut. xi. 2, 2 ^aaiXevf; Ka/x^vcrr]'? 'Va6vfi(p
TM <ypd<^ovTi ra irpooTrLirrovra koX BeeX^e/x&> Kai "EefxeXio)
ypa/xfxarel kuI roi? \oi7rol<; rot? avPTaaao/xevoa Kal
oUovaiv iv "Lafxapeia Kal ^olvlkt] rdSe Xeyei is certainly
taken from i Esd. 2=' and departs widely from 2 Esd. 4''
(notice the transliteration where i Esd., followed by Josephus,
translates). If Josephus knew 2 Esd. as the Septuagint
rendering of the canonical Hebrew text and i Esd. as the trans-
lation of a variant uncanonical fragment, his preference for
the latter is unaccountable. His action is perfectly clear, how-
ever, if we suppose him to have been acquainted with only one
Greek version, the Septuagint, of which i Esd. was a part. Again,
a quotation from the Greek version of 2 Ch. 2'^ made by the Greek
historian Eupolemus, writing about 150 B.C., contains the clause
€u\oyriT6<; 6 ^eo? 0? rov ovpavov Kal rrjv yr^v eKTiaev, which,
as Torrey argued, is almost certainly taken from a version of
which I Esd. formed a part (cf. ATC. p. 77, esp. f. n. 22).
The accepted Greek text (Theodotion 's), therefore, is only of
value for recovering the authoritative Hebrew of the second cen-
tury A.D., and beyond the limited assistance from Josephus, is our
40 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
chief early authority for criticising the text of i Ch. i to 2 Ch. 34.
Field (Hexapla, vol. I.) notes a few readings from the version of
Aquila (r. 125 a.d.) i Ch. 15" 25'^ 29", and a larger number from
that of Symmachus (c. 200 a.d.) i Ch. 5" 9' ii^ 1527 21'" 25'-3 26==
2 Ch. 12' 15' 19" 23" 26^ 30= 31" 32^ ;^T,^ 34", but these are not ex-
tensive enough to be of much value. For the criticism of 2 Ch.
35-36 we may add the testimony of the true Septuagint as pre-
served in I Esd. I. This dates from before 150 B.C., as is evidenced
by the Eupolemus fragment (v. s., cf. Schiir. GescJiJ III. pp. 351 /.).
Both the old Septuagint (i Esd.) and Theodotion are availabb
in two forms, the Lucian recension, based upon the Syro-Palestin-
ian tradition, and in Mss. representing the Egyptian tradition.
The Lucianic text is found in the cursives 19, 93, and 108,* and
these are the basis of Lagarde's edition of these books in Lihrorum
Veteris Testamenti Canonicorum pars prior. The remaining mss.
represent the Egyptian tradition and may be divided into two
groups; one led by B includes also S and 55, the second includes A
and the rest of the cursives. The remaining uncial N is un-
certain, but seems to follow the A group more frequently than the
B. The MSS. of the B group are probably Hexaplaric (cf. Tor.
^rC. pp. 91/.).
The Lucian recension is a thorough revision of the earlier Syro-
Palestinian tradition. The many arbitrary changes, together with
the natural textual corruption, make the task of detecting the
earlier basic text a difficult one, hence Lagarde's Lucian text must
be used with extreme caution. Doubtless some of its many con-
flated readings go back to the true Hebrew text, but this cannot be
assumed even when the reading would be a great improvement on
our Massoretic tradition. Much of the plus of L does not even
have a Hebrew original behind it. The Syro-Palestinian tradition
back of the Lucian recension probably did not differ very widely
from the Egyptian. The latter is better preserved by the A group
of MSS. than by B and its followers. A has frequently been rep-
resented as extensively corrected from the Massoretic text, but close
examination shows that no such comparison with the Hebrew could
* It appears from Swete, Introduction, pp. 154, 156, that 19 does not contain Ch. or i Esd.
and that Ch. is wanting in 93, but cj. Holmes and Parsons, vols. II. V., where they are given
in the lists of mss. containing these books and variants from them are frequently noted.
HEBREW TEXT AND THE VERSIONS 41
have been made, since nearly every page contains palpable blunders
which, in that case, would not have been allowed to stand. A con-
forms more closely to the Hebrew because it has, on the whole,
the better text, not because it has been made to conform, hence it
should always be given the preference over B, other testimony being
equal. The B ms. for Ch. is in especially poor condition. The
proper names are often damaged beyond recognition, dittographics
are only too common, and omissions by homoeoteleuton arc very
frequent. When compared with the A group and with the Syro-
Palestinian tradition B often furnishes valuable aid toward regain-
ing the original rendering, but it should not be quoted as Septua-
gint or even as the Greek text, an all too common practice. Gen-
erally speaking, when the A and B groups and the L recension
agree they furnish the original Greek rendering, but it sometimes
happens, especially in proper names, that none of these agree with
the Massoretic text when the latter was doubtless the translator's
original, all the Greek texts having become corrupted.
In the commentary the received Greek, i.e., the version of Theodotion,
has been quoted as (S and the Septuagint (in 2 Ch. 35-36) as (8 of i Esd.
Generally speaking, when the reading of certain Greek Mss. has been
cited, these are regarded as representing the original Greek rendering,
hence a variant Hebrew text, but frequently a variant Greek reading
found in one or more MSS. has been presented merely because it is of
possible worth. When the original has been regained by a comparison
of corrupt readings, it is cited with an asterisk ((§*).
The Latin Versions. — The Old Latin version would be of
special value for the criticism of the text of Chronicles, since the
Septuagint, from which it was made, has disappeared for all except
the last two chapters {y. s.). Unfortunately the Old Latin fared
little better. No extant ms. contains any extensive portion of
these books, but a number of fragments can be culled from the
Latin fathers, who quoted extensively from them. Sabatier {Bibli-
orum sacrorum Latince versiones antiquce, vol. L 1741) collected
from these and ms. sources the ancient Latin version of the fol-
lowing passages: i Ch. i" 2"- "■ "i^ n^ i2'8- ^S" lyn.u 218- nb. 12.
13. 17 22''"'' 28' 2 Ch 5'"''''^^ II^''' ^''- 12b-16a jr2 jg7b-9. 12 j-^S-Ta.
eb-12a jQ2b-ll 20'^'^' ^^ ' 36-37 2l'^- " " • 24*°'' 2'^"'' *' '^-l^. 20. 27 26'^''""
42 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
29= 32=^" =«" ^;^'\ These excerpts, however, must be compared
v.ith more recent editions of the Latin fathers before thcv can be
trusted. In the case of i Esd. we are better off, the Old Latin being
preserved in three mss. (Paris ms. Bibl. Nat. lat. iii, the ^ladrid
iMS. E. R. 8, and a Lucca ms., cf. Swete, Introduction, p. 95). This
version is of some value for recovering the Syro-Palestinian tra-
dition of the Septuagint.
The Latin version of Jerome, commonly called the Vulgate, was
a new translation made from the standard Hebrew text of the end
of the fourth century A.D., and independent of the Septuagint. Its
late origin detracts from its critical value for textual purposes. By
comparing it with the Theodotion Greek it frequently aids in the
removal of corruptions which made their way into the Hebrew text
at a comparatively late date. Its chief value, however, lies in the
realm of interpretation, where it supplies an early rendering of
the consonantal Hebrew text for the most part as it now stands,
which is often superior to the modem influenced by ]Massoretic
tradition.
The Syriac Versions. — The first Syriac translation of Chron-
icles is now a part of the Peshito, but originally Chronicles was not
received into the Syriac Canon. Indeed, when the book was sub-
sequently translated it did not meet with general acceptance. This
Syriac version seems to have been the work of Jews of Edessa.
While in most Old Testament books the Peshito follows the He-
brew text faithfully and even literally, with here and there extensive
influence from the Septuagint, Chronicles stands alone as the trans-
lation of a mere Jewish Targum and exhibits all the faults which
might be expected from such origin. One of its most striking
characteristics is found in the fact that the text has very frequently
been conformed to the text of Samuel and Kings. This is even
true of extended passages, as where i K. 12"-^" followed by i K.
14'-' are substituted for 2 Ch. 1 1^-12 '2. The substitute has the
authority of the best mss. and must be accepted as the original
Syriac text, i.e., the original translators had the text of S.-K. before
them. Numerous other instances might be cited where the text
agrees with S.-K. against Ch. in which we may possess the original
Syriac text, but where its testimony is absolutely worthless for the
HEBREW TEXT AND THE VERSIONS 43
criticism of the Hebrew text. Since there can be no doubt that
either the translators, or perhaps some later copyist, frequently
conformed Chronicles to its sources, the Peshito (^) may never be
cited hi support of readings of S.-K. as original in Chronicles.
This fact, together with the character of its origin, makes the
Peshito text of Chronicles practically worthless for critical pur-
poses. For discussion, see Frankel, JPT. iS'jg, pp. s^^ff-
The Peshito text of Chronicles is available in a number of edi-
tions, but all go back to the Paris Polyglot of 1645. The London
Polyglot (Walton's), published shortly after, reproduces the Paris
text without change. The first edition was printed from a very
poor MS., "Syr. 6" of the Bibliotheque Nationalc. Recently
W. E. Barnes has published the variant readings of the Mss. avail-
able to-day, and of the printed editions {An Apparatus Criticus to
Chronicles in the Peshitta Version, 1897). Walton's edition cor-
rected by this apparatus furnishes a good Peshito text.
The Syriac version of Paul of Telia was made in 616-7 a.d.,
from a Greek ms. ultimately derived from the Septuagint col-
umn of Origen's Hexapla. This was first made known to Europe
by Andreas Masius, who died in 1573, and he had a MS. which,
with other books, contained Chronicles, but this has disappeared.
The British Museum possesses a catena (Add. 12,168) contain-
ing fragments of Chronicles and the Books of Esdras. The
fragments of Chronicles are found on Foil. 57a-6oa (Wm.
Wright, Cat. of Syr. MSS. in Brit. Mus. Part II. p. 905), just
published by Gwynn {Remnants of the Later Syriac Versions
of the Bible, 1909, Part II. pp. 5-17). The portions of i Esd.
and Ne. were published by Torrey {AJSL. Oct. 1906, pp. 69-74),
but the MS. contains nothing of i Esd. i. The Syro-Hexaplar
text of I Esd., however, is found elsewhere and has been pub-
lished by Lagarde {Libri veteris testamenti apocryphi syriace),
hence we have its testimony for the recovery of the original
Septuagint text of 2 Ch. 35, 36 (i Esd. i).
The Arabic Version. — The Arabic version of Chronicles is
available in printed form in the Paris and London Polyglots {v. s.),
but is of little or no critical value. It is far removed from the orig-
inal Hebrew, and as a translation of the Peshito text (r/. Burkitt,
44 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
DB. I. p. 137) simply duplicates the testimony of that uncertain
version {v. s.).
The Ethiopic Version. — The Books of Chronicles are not
extant in the Ethiopic version, which, however, does contain the
first Book of Esdras. This is of value for regaining the Egyptian
recension of that portion of the Septuagint {v. s.).
The Targum. — The Aramaic paraphrase of Chronicles, like the
Targums of the other books of the Hagiographa, never had official
significance and was a commentary rather than a translation. It
was made from our Massoretic te.xt and possesses little critical
value. The text was first published by ^Matthias Friedrich Beck
from an Erfurt ms. in 1680 and 1683. Later (1715) David Wilkins
published the Aramaic text from a ms. in the Cambridge Library
* with a parallel Latin translation (Paraphrasis Chaldaica in Libriim
priorem et posteriorem Chronicorum). It was also published by
Lagarde in his Hagiographa Chaldaice, Leipzig, 1873. For a full
discussion see Kohler and Rosenberg, Das Targum der Chronik,
in Jud. Zeitschrift, 1870, pp. 72/., 135/., 263/.
§ 9. THE HIGHER CRITICISM AND LITERATURE.
The Books of Chronicles, from their supplementary and, through
their genealogical material, their unedifying character, have never
been a favourite field of study and investigation, hence their litera-
ture has always been relatively meagre. The books also, in their
variations from the other canonical writings, presented to early
students peculiar difficulties. Jewish scholars in the period of the
Talmud regarded them with suspicion, and later shrank from the
many problems which their genealogies presented (/£. IV. p. 60;
R. Simon, Hist. Crit. dii V. Test. I. IV.). Jerome, on the other
hand, was extravagant in their valuation, declaring, "He who
thinks himself acquainted with the sacred writings and does not
know these books only deceives himself" (Epist. ad Paulinum de
Studio Scripturarum). And again, "All knowledge of the Scrip-
ture is contained in these books" {Praf. in libr. Paralip., Epist.
ad Domnionem) . This valuation rested, however, without doubt
upon an allegorical interpretation and not upon any apprehension
of the real character of i and 2 Ch. No one seems to have fol-
THE HIGHER CRITICISM 45
lowed Jerome in his estimate, and while the books were gen-
erally vindicated by the few Jewish and Christian scholars who
commented upon them through the general assertion that they rested
upon authentic sources and by explaining away all appearances of
error, yet at the same time their discrepancies were made the basis
of arguments against the authority of the sacred Scriptures {cf.
Calmet, Comm. in V. T. IV. p. 510). (Spinoza had ridiculed the
attempts of Jewish scholars to remove the discrepancies between
the narratives of Chronicles and those of the earlier books and ex-
pressed his wonder that they had been received into the sacred
Canon by those who rejected the Apocryphal books, Trac. Tlieol.
Politki, cc. ix. and x.)
G. F. Oeder in his Freie Untersuchungen iiher einige Bucher
des A. T. (1771) spoke of their many corruptions (Ke.)- But for
real criticism and a worthy explanation we begin naturally with the
introduction of Eichhorn (i 780-1 782, 3rd ed. 1803). Eichhorn
went beyond the simple assertion of the Chronicler's use of au-
thentic and reliable sources to a theory upon which the varia-
tions and agreements between Chronicles and the earlier books
might be explained. In regard to the genealogies he recognised
that the Chronicler drew from the earlier canonical books, but
along with them he held that he had access to registers carefully
kept by the Levites and preserved in the Temple, serving as
titles to inheritances. These registers, subject to copyists' mis-
takes, were not always repeated in their complete form and many
pedigrees were abridged, hence the genealogical variations in i Ch.
The basis of the Chronicler's description of David and Solomon
was an old life of those two monarchs, also the basis of the narra-
tives in I and 2 S. and i K., which in the course of transmission
through many hands had suffered many changes, and in which the
Chronicler also made changes, such as his introduction of Satan,
the kindling of sacrifices by fire, etc.; also from historic records
the Chronicler mentioned the lists of the priests and Levites, the
contributions for the Temple, and other things of a similar nature.
The various works cited by the Chronicler such as "the words of
Shemaiah the Prophet and Iddo the Seer" (2 Ch. 12'^), "the Mid-
rash of the prophet Iddo" (2 Ch. 13") " the words of Jehu" (2 Ch.
46 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
20^0, the writing of " Isaiah the son of Amoz" (2 Ch. 26"), and the
works mentioned in 2 Ch. 32" 33^^'-, Eichhorn regarded as dis-
tinct writings of contemporaries of Israel's kings, now lost; while
the Midrash of the Book of Kings and the Book of the Kings of
Judah and Israel (2 Ch. 2^-^ 27' 28" 35-' 36') and the Book of the
Kings of Israel (2 Ch. 20=^) were secondary works; the last two
being one and the same work and identical with the Book of the
Chronicles of the Kings of Judah cited in i and 2 K. (Einl.^ ii. 595).
Eichhorn held strongly to the reliability of i and 2 Ch., owing to the
careful use of historical sources by the author.
This representative view of Eichhorn was sharply criticised by
De Wette (in his Beitrdge zur Einleilung, 1S06). He, by com-
parison, showed that Eichhorn's supposition of the Chronicler's
use of the underlying sources of i and 2 S. and i and 2 K. was
untenable. No real evidence was present that both the authors of
the canonical books and the Chronicler had drawn their material
from the same source; but far more likely all commion passages
were due to the use by the Chronicler of the canonical books. De
Wette then examined the variations between the writings and he
showed that through the Chronicler came marks of his late period,
slovenly or careless writing, confusions and alterations of mean-
ing, and that his additions were marked by a preference for the
concerns of the Levites, a love of marvels, apologies and pref-
erence for Judah and hatred of Israel, and embellishments of the
history of Judah. Thus the unreliability of the Clironicler was
abundantly shown.
Of the Chronicler's sources De Wette made little. "Several
writers," he said, "might have taken part in producing our present
Chronicles. Who will contend about that? But as the work lies
before us it is entirely of one character and one individuality and
thus may be assigned to one author" {Beitrdge, p. 61). The ques-
tion of the reliability of the Chronicler was largely bound up in that
of the Pentateuch, and of the general view of the Old Testament
Scriptures. Scholars or writers of a so-called rationalistic tend-
ency disparaged these books and accepted the conclusions of De
Wette (a good example is seen in F. W. Newman's History of the
Hebrew Monarchy, 1847), while on the other hand conservative or
THE HIGHER CRITICISM 47
orthodox scholars held the general view of Eichhorn in regara to
sources and defended the trustworthiness of i and 2 Ch. through-
out. Even upon those of a freer tendency, De Wette's work made
less of an impression than might have been expected. Bertholet,
who was willing to accept De Wette's low estimate of the historical
worth of Chronicles {Einl. III. p. 983), argued in behalf of the use
of common sources by the writers of Kings and Chronicles.
Ewald also, who had a clear conception of the general character of
the books, still in his history used them as a source of information
very nearly upon a par with the other Old Testament books. The
view in general was that the Chronicler, while often introducing the
notions of his own age, yet carefully followed his sources, which,
though more free and homiletic than the older canonical books in
their treatment of history, yet were scarcely inferior as records of
history — though when the two could not be reconciled the former
were to be received as of greater authority. (C/. Bertheau's treat-
ment throughout his commentary, 1854, 1873; Dillmann, PRE.
II. p. 694, 1854, PRE.' p. 224, 1878.)
De Wette's work was answered twelve years later in a small treatise
by J. G. Dahler {De Librorum Paralipomenon Auctoritate atque Fide
Hislorica Argentorati, 18 19). Each alleged discrepancy, taken up in
order from the beginning of i Ch. and through the two books, was
examined by itself and explained away or harmonised; and the author
concluded concerning the Chronicler: "Absolvendum eum esse ah islis in-
just is criminatioiiibus, et fidemejushisloricam, puram esse atque inte gram."
Dahler, as most of the apologists who followed him, overlooked the fact
that the judgment of a work must be determined by the impression made
by its phenomena grouped as a whole and that phenomena taken singly
can ordinarily be explained away. It had been the great merit of De
Wette's treatise that he "shaped the superabundant material to convey
the right impression."
Dahler's work was refuted by C. W. P. Gramberg in Die Chronik
nach ihreni geschichtlichem character and ihrer GlaubwUrdigheit gepruft
(Halle, 1823). This work was of little weight, owing to its charge of
extreme falsification by the Chronicler.
In 1833, C. F. Keil published his apology for Chronicles — Apologetischer
Versuch iiber die Bucher der Chronik und iiber die Integretdt des Buches
Ezra. This work, essentially in its main contentiori, 'reproduced later
in his OT. Intro, and Commentary on i and 2 Ch., held, as already noted
above (see p. 20), that the Chronicler did not draw his material from
48 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
the earlier canonical books of the OT., unless in the list of the patriarchal
families (i Ch. 1-22), and hence the parallelism between i and 2 Ch.
and I and 2 S. and i and 2 K. is due to common sources underlying each
(the view of Eichhorn). Cf. examples mentioned above, p. 20. The
varied charges brought by De Wette were refuted in detail and the
Chronicler was absolved from all error of statement, although later Keil
recognised in one instance that he was guilty of misapprehension
{Intro. II. p. 82).
In 1S34 appeared Kritische Untersuchiing iiber die biblische Chronik,
by F. C. Movers, a German pastor residing near Bonn. This work,
although defending in a large measure the historical reliability of i
and 2 Ch., since the author held to the Mosaic origin of the Levitical
institutions, was characterised by much critical acumen. In the matter
of sources the author advanced views practically identical with those
current at present. He held that the Chronicler used first of all the
canonical books, and secondly one other source, the Midrash or Com-
mentary upon the Book of Kings. This Book of Kings was neither
our Book of Kings, nor the "Chronicles" or Annals mentioned in
Kings, but a work which the authors of Samuel and Kings had used,
and whose author had made use of the Chronicles or Annals mentioned
in Kings. But the Midrash or Commentary on this Book of Kings was
a post-exilic work more didactic than purely historical, a connecting link
between the canonical Scriptures and the Apocrypha. Of this work
and of the canonical Scriptures the Chronicler was essentially a copyist.
Movers' view in this respect is that of Benzinger and Kittel, already
mentioned (see p. 25).
The problem of Chronicles was also discussed in detail by K. H. Graf,
in his Die Geschichtlichen Biicher d. AT. (1S66). Graf examined the
narratives of Chronicles in the light of those of the canonical books, and
his conclusions were similar to De Welte's respecting the work as a tend-
ency writing largely unhistorical in character. He differed from Movers,
holding that the Chronicler was not a mere copyist and that to him as
an independent writer belonged the characteristics of his work and not
to a Midrashic source. On the other hand, he rejected the notion that
he had no other sources than the canonical books and allowed historical
reminiscences in his new material. The next most fruitful discussion
of our problem is Wellhausen's brilliant chapter on Chronicles in his
Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels {iS,-?>, 1883, Eng. trans. 1885). There
the position of De Wette is restated and the Chronicler's work is ex-
hibited essentially in the character which we have given, although W2
are inclined to find more of historical reminiscence in certain instances
than Wellhausen allows, but his sketch of the Chronicler's work as a
whole is correct. For the recent views of Benzinger and Kittel respect-
ing the composition of Chronicles see pp. 25/.
LITERATURE 49
LITERATURE.
(Authors of the most important works are indicated by the heavy type.)
Text. — S. Baer and F. Delitzsch, Liber Chronicorum (1888) (text
with critical and Massoretic appendices by Baer and an introduction
by Del.); David Ginsburg, aiDinji ovn^dj min (1894), pp. 1676-
1808 (text based upon the Boniberg Bible of 1524-5, with variant read-
ings in the foot-notes); R. Kittel, The Books of Chronicles in Hebrew
(1895) (in Haupt's Sacred Books of the OT.) (the unpointed text, with
critical notes trans, by B. W. Bacon); R. Kittel, Biblia Hebraica, II.
(1906) pp. 1222-1320 (text with foot-notes citing variants in MSS., Vrss.,
and Bibl. sources).
Translations and Commentaries. — Hieronymus (d. 420), Quaes-
tiones Hebraicce in Paralipomeua in appendix to vol. III. of his works
(pub. in Migne's Palrologia Latino, vol. 23, coll. 1365-1402); Theodoret,
Bishop of Cyrus (ist half of 5th cent.), Quaestiones in Paralipomena
(pub. in Migne's Patrologia Graca, vol. 80, coll. 801-5S); Procopius
Gazasus (ist half of 6th cent.), Commentarii in Paralipomena (pub. in
Migne's Palrologia Grceca, vol. 87, part I. coll. 1201-20); Rabanus
Maurus (c. 776-856), Commentaria in libros duos Paralipomenon (pub.
in Migne's Patrologia Latiiia, vol. 109, coll. 279-540); David Kimhi
(1160-1235) (Kimhi's commentary on Ch. was pub. in the Rabbinic
Bible of 1547 and elsewhere); Levi ben Gerson (i 288-1344) wrote com.
on Ch. (Rich. Simon, Hist. Crit. p. 28); Alphonsus Tostatus (Tostado),
Comment, (on hist, books of the Bible, 1507); R. Joseph fil. David
Aben Jechija {Comment, in Hagiogr. 1538) (Carpzov); R. Isaac bar R.
Salomo Jabez {Hagiogr. Constantinople) (Carpzov); Basil. Zanchius,
In omnes divinos libros notationes (1553); Erasmus Sarcerius (1560)
(Carpzov); Vict. Strigel, Libb. Sam., Reg., et Paralipom. (1591); Lud.
Lavater, Comm. in Paralip. (1599); Sebastian. Leonhardus (1613)
(Carpzov); Nic. Serarius, Comment, in libr. Reg. et Paralip. (1617);
Casp. Sanctius, Comment, in 4 libr. Reg. et 2 Paralipom. (1625); Jac.
Bonfrerius, Comment, in libr. Reg. et Paralip. (1643); Hug. Grotius,
Annotatt. in Vet. Test. (1644) {Paralip. in edition of 1732 (Basil) vol. I.
PP- i7S~89); Arthur Jackson, Help for the Under sta7iding of the Holy
Scrip.; or Annot. on the Hist, part of the OT. 2 vols. (1643 and 1646);
Thomas Malvenda, Commentaria in sacram .Scripturam (1650); Christ.
Schotanus, in Biblioth. histories sacrcs V. T. vol. II. (1662); D. Brenius,
Annot. Parol, (in Opera Theologia, 1666, foil. 21-23); Fran. Burmann,
Comment. . . . Paralip. . . . (1660-83); Jacob Cappel, Observationes
in Lib. Paralip. (in Comment, et Not. Crit. in V. T. by Lud. Cappel,
1689, pp. 651-4); S. Patrick, .4 Commentary upon the Historical Books
of the OT. (1694; Ch. in new edition, vol. II. (1842) pp. 464-618); Jo.
4
50
I AND 2 CHRONICLES
Clericus, Commentarius in Vetus Test. vol. II. (1708) pp. 519-640;
Matthew Henry, An Exposition of the Historical Books of tlie O. T. (Ch.
in vol. II. 1708); H. B. Slarck, Notce sel. critt. philoU. exegg. in loca
dubia ac difficiliora Pent., . . . Chron., . . . (1714); J- H. Michaelis
and Rambach, Anttott. in Paral. (1720) (in Uberiores Adnotationes in
Libros Hagiographos V. T., J. H. Mich, wrote on i Ch. and Rambach
on 2 Ch.); S. J. Mauschberger. Comm. in LL. Paralip. . . . (1758);
J. D. Michaelis, Uebersetzung des AT. mil Anmerkk.fur Ungelehrte, vol.
XII. (1785) pp. 151-310 (the trans.) and pp. 171-304 of app. (notes);
A. Calmet, Commentarius Literalis in Omnes Libros Testamenti, vol. IV.
(1791) pp. 512-S27; Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible (Ch. in vol. II.
1821); F. J, V. Maurer, Commentarius Grammaticus Criticus in
Vetus Testamentum, vol. I. (1835) pp. 232-44; J. Benson, The Holy
Bible with Critical, Explanatory and Practical Notes (Ch. in vol. II.
1850, pp. 233-38S); Chr. Wordsworth, Kings, Chronicles, etc.^ (1868)
(vol. III. of The Holy Bible with Notes and Introductions); C. F. Kail,
BUcher der Chronik (1870) (in Biblischer Kommentar iiber d. .AT. Eng.
trans, by Andrew Harper, 1872); B. Neteler, Die Biicher der biblischen
Chronik (1872); E. Bertheau, Bucher der Chronik"- (1873) (in Kurzgef.
Exeget. Handbuch zum AT.); George Ravk'linson, Chronicles (1873)
(in vol. III. of The Holy Bible, edited by F. C. Cook); O. Zbckler, in
Lange's Bibelwerk (1874) (Eng. trans, by J. G. Murphy); E. Reuss,
Chronique ecclesiastique de Jerusalem (1878) (La Bible. IV. part); Clair,
Les Paralipomenes (1880); Vilmar, Josua bis Chronika (1882) (in
Prakt. Erkl. der Heil. Schrift herausgegeben von Chr. Micller); C. J.
Ball, in Bishop Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers (1883); P. C.
Baker, /. and II. Chronicles (in The Pulpit Commentary of Spence and
Exell), 2 vols. (1884); S. Oettli, Bucher der Chronik (1889) {in Kurzgef
Exeget. Kommentar z. AT.); M. J. Tedeschi and S. D. Luzzatto, Com-
mentar zu den BB. Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah und Chronik (1S90); J.
Robertson, in Book by Book (1892), pp. 111-19; W. H. Bennett, The
Books of Chronicles (1894) (in The Expositor's Bible); E. Kautzsch,
Die Heilige Schrift des Alien Testaments (1894), translation, pp. 936-
1012, critical notes in supplement, pp. 91-9S; R. G. ISIoulton, Chroni-
cles (1897) (The Modern Reader's Bible); W. E. Barnes, The Book
of Chronicles (1900) (Cambridge Bible); I. Benzinger, Die Biicher der
Chronik (1901) (in Kiirzer Hand-Commentar z. AT.); A. Hughes-
Games, The Books of Chronicles (1902) (Temple Bible); R. Kittel,
Die Biicher der Chronik (1902) (in Handkommentar z. AT.); R. de
Hummelauer, Comment, in Librum I Paralipom. (1905); W. R. Harvey-
Jellie, Chronicles (1906) (The Century Bible).
Critical Discussions. — Richard Simon, Histoire Critique dii Vieux
Testament (1685), Book I. Chap. iv. pp. 27 /.; Joh. Gottlob Carpzov,
Introductio ad Libros Canonicos Bibliorum Veteris Testamenti (1731),
LITERATURE 5I
Part I. pp. 279-303; J. G. Eichhorn, Einl.^ II. (1803) pp. 579-601;
W. M. L. de Wette, Kritischcr Versuch ilber die Glaubenswiirdigichkeit
dcr Biicher der Chronik (1806) {BeUrdge ziir Einl. in d. AT. vol. I.);
L. Bertholdt, Einl, Part 3 (1813), pp. 963-91; J- G. Dahlcr, De
librorum Paralipom. auctoritate atque fide historica (1819); C. P. W.
Gramberg, Die CJironik nach ihrem geschiclUlichen Charakter tind ihrer
Glaubwiirdigkeit neii gepriift (1823); C. P. W. Gramberg, de geloofwaar-
digheid en het belang van de Chron. voor de Bijb. Gescli. (1830); Die
Biicher der Chronik. Ihr Verhdltniss zii den Biichern Samuels und der
Konige; Hire Glaubwiirdigkeit, und die Zeii ihrer Ab/assung, in Thcolo-
gische Quartalschrift (Tubingen, 183 1), pp. 201-82; C. F. Keil, Apolo-
getischer Versuch ilber die Chronik (1833); F. C. Movers, Kritische
Untersuchungen ilber die biblische Chronik (1834); W. M. L. de Wette,
Einleitung in d. AT.'' I. (1S52) pp. 237-259; T. H. Home, Introduction
to tlie Critical Study of the Holy Scriptures^o (1856), vol. II. pp. 673-688;
K. H. Graf, Die Gefangenschaft und Bekehrung Manasse's, 2 Chr. 33,
in Theologische Studien und Kriliken (1859), pp. 467-94; J. Bleek,
Einl. (i860) pp. 371-401 (4th ed. 1S78, Eng. trans, from 2nd ed. 1869);
Gerlach, Die Gefangenschaft und Bekehrung Manasse's, in Theol.
Studien u. Kritiken (1861), pp. 503-24; W. H. Green, Date of Books of
Chronicles, in Princeton Review, XXXV. (1863) p. 499; K. H. Graf,
Die GeschiclUlichen Biicher d. AT. (1866) pp. 114-247; Abr. Rahmer,
Ein Lateinischer Commentar aus deni 9. Jahrhund. z. d. Biichern d.
Chronik kritisch verglichen mil d. Judischen Quellen (1866); De Wette-
Schr. Einl. (1869) §§ 224-33; H. Ewald, History of Israel,'^ I. (1869)
pp. i6g ff.; Kohler and Rosenberg, Das Targum der Chronik, in Jiid.
Zeitschrift (1870), pp. 72/., 135/., 263/.; J. Wellhausen, De Gentibus
et Familiis Judceis qucB 1 Chr. 2. 4. enumerantur (1870); C. F. Keil,
£/«/.' (1873) §§ 138-144 (Eng. trans, from 2nd ed., 1870); W. R.
Smith, Chronicles, Books of, in Encycl. Britannica^ (1878); R. O. Thomas,
A Key to the Books of Samuel and the Corresponding Parts of Chronicles
(18S1); Frz. Delitzsch, The Book of the Chronicles, in Sunday School
Times (1S83), Nov. 24, pp. 739/.; G. T. Ladd, The Doctrine of Sacred
Scripture (1883), I. pp. 108/., 373 f., 546 f., 686/.; E. Schrader, COT.
[1883] (1888) II. pp. 52-59; J, Wellhausen, Prolegomena (1883), pp.
176-237, Eng. trans. (1885) pp. 171-227; J. L. Bigger, The Battle
Address of Abijah, 2 Chr. 13: 4-12, in OT. Student, vol. 3 (1883-4),
pp. 6-16; F. Brown, The Books of Chronicles with Reference to the
Books of Samuel, in Andover Review, I. (1884) pp. 405-26; Miihling,
Neue Untersuchungen ilber die Genealogien der Chronik r, 1-9, und
deren Verhdltniss zum Zweck dieses Buches, in Thenlog. Quartalschrift
(1884), pp. 403-50; W. H. BTOwn, The OT. Explained, Giving the Key
to the Harmony of the OT. Writings, and espec. the Books of K., Ch., etc.
(1885); Cornely, Hist, et crit. Introductio in V. T. libros sacros Compen-
52
I AND 2 CHRONICLES
dium, II. I (1887), pp. 311/; A. Kuenen, Onderzoek^ I. (1887) pp.
433-520, German trans., Einl. part I, div. 2 (1890), pp. 103-89;
M. S. Terry, Chronicles and tlie Mosaic Legislation (1888), in Essays on
Penlateuchal Criticism (edited by T. W. Chambers, and republished
under title Moses and his Recent Critics, 1889), pp. 213-45; E. Alker,
Die Chronologic der Bilcher Konige und Paralipomenon . . . (1889);
B. Stade, Geschr- (1889) I. pp. 81-84; C. H. Cornill, Einleitung (1891),
pp. 268-276, Eng. trans. (1907) pp. 225-39; L. B. Paton, Alleged Dis-
crepancies between Books of Chronicles and Kings, in Presbyterian
Quarterly (Richmond, Va.), vol. 5 (1891), pp. 587-610; G. Wildeboer,
Origin of the Canon of the OT. [1891] (1895) pp. 142 /., 152, 162;
K. Budde, Vermutungen zum "Midrasch des Baches der Konige," in
ZAW. vol. 12 (1892), pp. 37-51; A. C. Jennings, Chronicles, in The
Thinker, vol. 2 (1892), pp. 8-16, 199-206, 393-401; C. G. Montefiore,
Hibbert Lectures (1892), pp. 447/-. 454, 483; H. E. Ryle, Canon of the
OT. (1892) pp. 138/., 145, 151, 162; W. R. Smith, OTJCr- (1892) pp.
14/., 182/.; H. Winckler, Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen (1892),
pp. 157-67 {Bemerkungen z. chronik als geschichtsquelle); A. C. Hervey,
The Book of Chronicles in Relation to the Pentateuch (1S93); H. H.
Hovvorth, The True Septuagint Version of Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, in
The Academy (1893), vol. 44, pp. 73/.; E. Konig, Einl. (1893) § 54;
W. Sanday, Inspiraiion (1893) (Bampton Lectures), pp. 102, 244, 253/.,
39S, 443, 455 ; H. Varley, The Infallible Word . . . the Historical
Accuracy of the Books of Kings and Chronicles (1893); R. B. Girdlestone,
Deuterographs, Duplicate Passages in the OT., their bearing on the Text
and Compilation, etc. (1894); T. F. Wright, Chronicles, in New Church
Review, I. (1894) pp. 455-6; W. Bacher, Der Name der Bilcher der
Chronik in der Septuaginta in Z.A.W. vol. 15 (1S95), pp. 305-8; S. R.
Driver, The Speeches in Chronicles, in Exp. 5th series, vol. i. (1895) pp.
241-56, vol. 2, 1895, pp. 286-308; Valpy. French, The Speeches in
Chronicles; a reply, in Exp. 5th series, vol. 2 (1895), pp. 140-152;
F. Kaulen, Paralipomena, in Kirchenlexikon, vol. 9 (1895), pp. i479/-;
S. Krauss, Bibl. Volkertafel in Talmud. Midrasch und Targum, in
Monatsschrift fur Geschichte u. Wissenschaft d. Judenthums, vol. 39
(1895) pp. i-ii, 49-63; G. Wildeboer, Lit. d. AT. (1895), pp. 404-420;
W. E. Barnes, The Midrashic Element in Chronicles, in Exp. 5th series,
vol. 4 (1896), pp. 426-39; G. B. Gray, HPN. (1896) pp. 170-242;
W. E. Barnes, Tlie Religious Standpoint of tJie Chronicler, in AJSL.
XIII. (1896-7) pp. 14-20; W. E. Barnes, Chronicles a Targum, in
Expos. T. VIII. (1896-7) pp. 316-19; T. K. Cheyne, On 2 Ch. 14 : 9,
etc., in Expos. T. VIII. (1896-7) pp. 431/; H. L. Gilbert, Forms of
Names in I. Chronicles 1-7, in AJSL. XIII. (1896-7) pp. 279-98;
Fr. Hommel, Serah the Cushite, in Expos. T. VIII. (1896-7) pp. 378/-;
W. E. Barnes, An Apparatus Criticus to Chronicles in the Peshitta
LITERATURE
53
Versiofi (1897); W. D. Crockett, A Harmony of the Books of Samtiel,
Kings and Chronicles, in the Text of the Version of 1884 (1897); W. E.
Barnes, Errors in Chronicles, in Expos. T. IX. (1897-8) p. 521; John F.
Stenning, Chronicles in the Pesliitta, in Expos. T. IX. (1897-8) pp. 45-7;
W. Bacher, Zii I. Chron. 7 : 12, in ZAW. vol. 18 (1898), pp. 236-8;
F. Brown, Chronicles I. and II., in DB. I. (1898) pp. 389-397; A.
Klostermann, Die Chronik, in PRE.^ III. (1898) pp. 85-98; Schurer,
Gesch.^ (1898) II. pp. 309, 339/., III. p. 311, Eng. trans, (from. 2nd ed.)
II. i. pp. 309, 340, iii. p. 162; W. J. Beecher, Is Chronicler Veracious
Historian for Post-exilian Period? in The Bible Student atid Religious
Outlook (Columbia, S. C), vol. 3 (1899), pp. 385-90; Adolf Biichler,
Zur Geschichte der Tempelmusik und der Tempelpsalmen, in ZAW.
vol. 19 (1899), pp. 96-133, 329-44; Grigor Chalateanz, Die Biicher
Paralipom. nach der dltesten. Armen. Uebers., etc. (1899); Hope W.
Hogg, The Genealogy of Benjatnin; a Criticism of I. Chron. VIII., in
JQR. XI. (1899) pp. 102-14; A. van Hoonacker, Le Sacerdoce Levitique
dans la Loi et dans I'Histoire (1S99), pp. 21-116 {Les pretres et les
levites dans le livre des Chroniques) ; E. Kautzsch, The Literature of the
OT. (1899) pp. 121-8 (trans., with revision, from supplements to Z)ze
Heil. Schr. d. AT."^); J. Koberle, Die Tempelsanger im AT. (1899) pp.
81-150 (Chronika); O. Seesemann, Die Darstellungsweise der Chronik,
in Mitth. u. Nachr.f. d. Evang. Kirche in Russland, 55 (1899), pp. 1-16;
W. R. Smith and S. R. Driver, Chrojiicles, Books of, in EBi. I. (1899)
coll. 763-72; T. G. Soares, The Import of Chronicles as a Piece of
Religio-historical Literature, in Am. Jour, of Theo. III. (1899) pp. 251-
74; M. Berlin, Notes on Genealogies of the Tribe of Levi in i Chron.
23-26, in JQR. XII. (1900) pp. 291-8; J. A. Howlett, Wellhausen and
the Chronicler, in The Dublin Review, vol. 126 (1900), pp. 391-411;
K. D. Macmillan, Note Concerning the date of Chronicles, in Presby-
terian and Reformed Review, XI. (1900) pp. 507-11; Hope W. Hogg,
The Ephraimite Genealogy (i Ch. 7 : 20/.), in JQR. XIII. (1900-01) pp.
147-54; G. O. Little, The Royal Houses of Israel and Judah (1901);
J. Marquart, The Genealogies of Benjamin, in JQR. XIV. (1902) pp.
343-51; J- W. Rothstein, D. Genealogie d. Kgs. Jojachin U7id seiner
Nachkommen (i Chron. 3 : 17-24) in Gesch. Beleuchtung (1902);
W. H. Bennett, Chronicles in JE. IV. (1903), pp. 59-63; Mos. Fried-
lander, Genealog. Studien 2. AT. D. Verdnderlichkeit d. Namen in d.
Stammlisten d. BUclier d. Chronik (1903); C. C. Torrey, The Greek
Versions of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, in Proceedings of the
Society of Biblical Archceology, XXV. (1903) pp. 139/.; W. J. Beecher,
The Added Section in I Chron. XI-XII, in The Bible Student and
Teacher, vol. i, New Series (1904), pp. 247-50; R. St. A. Macalister,
The Royal Potters i Chron. 423, in Expos. T. XVI. (1905) pp. 379/.;
R. St. A. Macalister, Tlie Craftsmen's Guild of the Tribe of Judah, in
54 I AND 2 CHRONICLES
Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement (1905), pp. 243-253,
32S-342; P. Asmusscn, Priesterkod. u. Chr. in ihrent Verh. zii einand.,
in Theolog. Studien u. Kritiken (1906), pp. 165-179; G. Tandy, / a. II
Chron., an Elementary Study in Criticism (Interpr., Oct.) (mentioned in
Theolog. Jahresbe., 1906); S. A. Cook, Critical Notes on OT. Hist.
(1907), pp. 67 n. I, 98 n. 3, 104 n. i, 114/., 118 n. i; H. H. Howorth,
Some Unconventional Views on the Text of the Bible. VII Daniel and
Chronicles, in Proceedings of tlie Society of Biblical Archcsology, XXIX.
(1907) pp. 31-38, 61-69; S. K. Mosiman, Zusammenstelltmg u. Ver-
glcichuiig d. Paralleltexte d. Chr. u. d. dlteren BiicJier d. AT. (1907);
S. R. Driver, LOT.^^ (1908) pp. 516-540; C. C. Torrey, Tlie Ap-
paratus for the Textual Criticism of Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, in
Harper Memorial II. (1908) pp. 55-11 1; W. E. Barnes, The David of
the Book of Samuel and the David of the Book of Chronicles, in Exp.
7th Series. No. 37 (1909), pp. 49-59; A. Klostermann, Chronicles, in
The New Schaff-Herzog Encyl. vol. III. (1909) pp. 68-71; C. C.
Torrey, The Chronicler as Editor and as Independent Narrator, in
AJ.SL. XXV. (1909) pp. 157-73, 1SS-217.
A COMMENTARY ON
1 CHRONICLES
I
COMMENTARY ON 1 CHRONICLES
I-IX. GENEALOGICAL TABLES WITH GEOGRAPH-
ICAL AND HISTORICAL NOTICES.
I. Primeval genealogies with a list of kings and phylarchs
of Edom. — This chapter serves to introduce the genealogies of
the tribes of Israel by showing Israel's place among the nations
and thus corresponds to the ethnic discussions with which mod-
ern writers frequently open their histories. Its matter is derived
entirely from Gn. 1-36. All the genealogies of those chapters are
included in this compilation except that of the descendants of
Cain (Gn. 4'8-"). The author's method of abridgment, in giving
lists of names (vv. '-^ et al.) without stating their relation to one
another, shows that he assumed his readers to have been thor-
oughly familiar with the narratives of Genesis.
While the source is clear, the question has recently been raised whether
the chapter is substantially in the form in which it was left by the
Chronicler or whether an original nucleus by him received numerous
additions until the genealogical material of Gn. was exhausted. Ben-
zinger maintains that the original text comprised only vv. i-"" *'''' 24-28.
3">. The Vatican text of <& lacks vv. "-2', which are in the Hexapla under
the asterisk (Field), and a sort of doublet exists in vv. '^'^ and vv. 24. ^,
These facts have furnished the ground for assuming the secondary
character of vv. ""'. But the significant words vlbs "L-fifi. AiXa/x Kal
'Affffoiip, found in this lacuna of (^^, are certainly a remnant of v. "
— so marked in Swete's edition — thus making it extremely probable
that the original (B contained the whole passage. (This omission by
Origen is only one of many illustrations which might be cited of the
poor quality of the text which he had; see Tor. ATC. pp. 94/.) The
parallels, vv. "'^ and vv. ^4 25, are not indicative of two sources, since
in one the compiler is tracing the collateral lines, while in the other it is
his purpose to give the lineal descent of Abraliam. The transpositicici
57
58 I CHRONICLES
of vv. "-" (= Gn. 25"-'") and vv. "" (= Gn. 25'*) has no significance,
since it is easily explained, the descendants of Ishmael, the first-born,
being placed first and those of Isaac, by the compiler's habit, come last.
Equally trivial is the repetition of the substance of v. ^sa jn v. 3^". The
descendants of Esau (vv. ^ ^ ) are as much in place here as the descend-
ants of Ishmael and of Abraham by Keturah. Hence there is little
cause to doubt that the first chapter of the Chronicler's history has
come down to us in essentially the same form in which it left his hand.
1-4. The ten antediluvian patriarchs and the three sons
of Noah. — This list of names is a condensation of Gn. 5 by the
omission of the chronological statements and those of descent from
father to son; and the list in Gn. is apparently modelled after the
Babylonian one of ten ancient kings which has been preserved by
Berossus (Dr. Gn. p. 80, K AT J pp. 531/., Gordon, Early Trad, of
Gn. pp. 4Sff-)- The names appear in some instances to have been
derived from the Babylonian list and are also directly connected
in a large measure with the names found in the genealogies of
Gn. 4 (J). — 1. Adam] i.e., man or mankind, an appropriate
name for the first man, the father of the human race; hence a
proper name (Gn. 4" 51-5, RV. wrongly in Gn. 3"- =', v. DTS,
3. B'DB.).—Seth] (Gn. 4" ' 5' " f) derived in Gn. 4^, proba-
bly from mere assonance, from ri"'tr "to appoint," hence, "sub-
stitute"; the meaning or derivation is otherwise entirely
obscure. — Enosh] (tl-'l^S) (Gn. 4-^ 5^ ^ |) poetical word for
man and probablv in folk-lore a name like Adam for the first man.
The third Babylonian name Amelon or Amilarus has also the same
meaning. — 2. Kenan] (p"*^) (Gn. 5' ^ f) to be connected with
Kain (j'^p) (Gn. 4' " ), with the meaning of "smith," and thus
corresponding with the fourth Babylonian name Ammenon, whicli
is equivalent to "artificer." — MahalaVel] (Gn. 5'^ " , also a Judah-
ite, Ne. 11* f). The meaning is "praise of God." It is possibly
a Hebraised form of the fifth Babylonian name Megalarus, a cor-
ruption of Melalarus. — Jared] (Gn. 5'* « , also a Calebite 4" f),
from the root meaning to go down, but the significance of the name
is not apparent. — 3. Hanoch] EVs. Enoch (Gn. 5'* " , also the first-
born of Cain, Gn. 4" ' , also a son of Reuben, i Ch. 53). He, from
hiA," translation," is the most notable of the ten patriarchs (Gn.
I. 1-4.] ANTEDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS 59
5'<). The name may mean "dedication," and might in the story
of Cain be connected with the building of the first city (Gn. 4"), or
if derived from parallel Babylonian king Enmeduranki. who
probably was the mythical high priest of a place linking heaven and
earth, the name might imply dedication to the priesthood. This,
considering Enoch's religious character, is more plausible. The
initiation of Enoch into heavenly mysteries, according to the later
Jewish story, probably arose from a connection between him and
the Babylonian parallel, since the latter was the possessor of such
knowledge. — Methushelah] (Gn. 5=' « f), "man of missile." The
corresponding name in Gn. 4' Ms Methushael = Babylonian miitu-
sha-ili, "man of God." The corresponding name in the Babylo-
nian Ust Amempsm\is= a mel-Sin, "man of the god Sin"; hence
"missile," shelah, is probably another title of Sin, i.e., of the moon-
god. — Lamech] (Gn. 4^^^ 5"ff ■}•). The important position of the
Larnech in the line of Cain, where he is the father of the representa-
tives of three social classes — nomads, musicians, and smiths — and
in the line of Seth, where he is the father of Noah and grandfather
of the representatives of the three races of mankind, reveals the
probable identity of the two persons in origin, but whence the name
is derived is still obscure, probably from an ancient Babylonian
god. — 4. Noah] (Gn. 5"^ and frequent in story of the flood, Gn.
6-10, Is. 549 Ez. i4i«- 20). The Noah of Gn. 5" (J) is clearly the
husbandman who produced wine (Gn. 9^°* ), and thus gave man
rest, refreshment, and comfort in his toil. Why the hero of the
flood also bore this name is not clear, since no certain connection is
discernible between the name Noah (nj) and Ut-napishiim, the
name of the Babylonian hero of the deluge. — Shem] (w. "• ^^ Gn.
^32 510 yi3 gi8. 23. 26 f. jqi. 21 f. 31 nio f. |) mcans rcnowu, i.e., glory,
and apparently was a name of Israel (r/. Gn. 9^^ Blessed be Yah-
weh the God of Shem, i.e., of Israel). — Ham] (v. ^ Gn. 5" 6'° 7''
gis iQi. 6. 20) superseding possibly the name Canaan in an earlier
list of Noah's three sons (r/. Gn. 9" J) is possibly derived from
Kemet the Egyptians' name of their country (DB., art. Ham;
EBi. II. col. 1204 absolutely denies this connection). Ham
stands for Egypt in Ps. 78^' 105"- " 106". Thus Ham appro-
priately represented the peoples southward from Palestine. —
6o I CHRONICLES
Japheth] (v. * Gn. 5" 6'° 7'' 9'' " " 10' = ^i -}-)_ According to Gn.
9" the word is from the root (nnS), meaning " to be open " (so
BDB., MargoHouth in DB. suggests a derivation from nS^ "to be
fair)," but the real origin is still obscure. It primarily comes
without doubt from some appellation of the peoples or country
lying to the north and west of Israel, because in those directions
the descendants of Japheth are found (vv. 5-7). Japheth may
have represented originally the Phoenicians, since the expression
dwelling in the tents of Shem (Gn. 9") points to c land ad-
jacent to Palestine {DB. Extra vol. p. 80).
2. jrp] so too Gn. 5' ^-^■, but C5 ^aivdv, B Cainaii, in both places,
show a different pronunciation of the diphthong which may have been in
use in the Chronicler's day, cf. Ki. SBOT. pp. 52/., Kom. pp. 2/.
5-7. The descendants of Japheth. — These verses are taken
directly without change from Gn. 10--" (P). Whatever variations
the two texts now exhibit are due to the copyists of one or the other
unless the text used by the Chronicler differed from the archetype
of ^. This is also true of all other cases where the Chronicler
clearly reproduces the exact words of his parallels. For variations
see textual notes. These nations or peoples must all be sought to
the north and west of Palestine. — 5. Gomer] (v. « Gn. 10- ' Ez.
38^, name of a person Ho. i' f) a people of Asia Minor identical
with the Gimirrai of Assyrian inscriptions. Their territory in
Armenian is called Gamir. It corresponds to Cappadocia. They
are the Kimmerians of the Greeks. — Magog'\ (Gn. 10- Ez. 38= 396 f )
from collocation in Ezekicl and from assonance is closely related
to Gog, which apparently is the Gagaia of the Amarna tablets, a
designation of northern barbarians. The traditional identification
with the Scythians is plausible (EBi. II. coll. 1747/.). — Madai] i.e.,
the Medes mentioned frequently in the OT. — Javan] (v. ' Gn>
10- ' Is. 66'^ Ez. 27'3 '3 Dn. 8'-' io-° 11" Zc. 9'^ pi. Jo. 4« (3'') f) the
Greeks, or more properly the lonians. — Tubal and Mesliech]
(mentioned always together Gn. 10= Ez. 27" 32^5 38^ '• 39', except
Is. 66'% where Tubal occurs alone and Ps. 120% where Meshech,
alone). They arc the Tibdli and Mushku of the Assyrian inscrip-
I. 5-7.J DESCENDANTS OF JAPHETH 6l
tions and the Moschoi and Tibarenoi of Herodotus (iii. 94, vii.
78). In the Assyrian period their home was north-ea:t of Cilicia
and east of Cappadocia; later they retired further to the north to
the mountainous region south-east of the Black Sea (Dr. Gn.). —
Tiras] (Gn. 10- f) formerly identified with the Thracians (so Jos.
Ant. i. 6. i) but now generally with the Tyrseui (TvpaTjvoi), a pi-
ratical people of the northern shores and islands of the ^Egean Sea
(Hdt. i. 57, Thuc. iv. 109). Tims has also been regarded as the
same as Tarshish v. ' (W. Max Miiller, Orient Lit. Zeitnng, 15 Aug.
1900, col. 290). — 6. Ashkenaz] (Gn. 10' Je. 51" -j-). Their home,
according to Jeremiah, was in the region of Ararat, and they are
undoubtedly the Ashkuza, Ishkiiza of the Assyrians; an ally of the
Assyrians from the reign of Asarhaddon onward, and possibly
identical with the Scythians {KA T.^ p. loi) ; the Hebrew name has
arisen apparently through a confusion of letters (TJ^D'S instead of
Tirii'S). — Riphath^] not yet clearly identified or located; ac-
cording to Josephus (Ant. i. 6. i), the 'Paphlagon'mns.—Togannah]
(Gn. 10^ Ez. 27" 38'' f). The references in Ez. indicate a northern
country furnishing horses and mules, usually identified with the
Armenians and by some connected with the city Tilgarimmu of the
Assyrian inscriptions (EBi. IV. col. 5129, Del. Par. p. 246).— 7.
And the sons ofJavan] to be sought naturally among the countries
or peoples belonging to the Greeks.— Elishah] (Gn. 10' Ez. 27 'f), a
land that according to Ezekiel furnished " blue and purple," hence,
since these dyes were procured from shell-fish, a Grecian maritime
country: lower Italy and Sicily have been suggested (Dill.), the
Cohans (AioXet?) (Del.), Elis (HXi?) (Boch.), Carthage as
though called Elissa (SS.). — Tarshish] (Gn. 10^ and frequent else-
where), commonly identified with Tartessus in Spain, yet not con-
clusively so. Tarsus in Cilicia has also been named (EBi. IV. col.
4898). — Kitlim] (Gn. 10^ Nu. 24^^ Is. 23' '* Je. 2i» Ez. 27'= Dn.
11^" f) represents Cyprus. The name is derived from the city
Kition on the south-east shore of the island. — Rodanim f ] (Gn. 10*
wrongly Dodanim) people of the Island of Rhodes.
6. nfl^-11] about thirty mss. (Kennic, Gin.), 05, B, and Gn. 10' nom,
which is to be restored as the original (Kau., Ki.). — 7. ni'^a'im] Gn.
io< tr'ijnpi. The final n probably arose through the influence of the
62 I CHRONICLES
preceding naf>hi< and is to be removed (Kau., Ki.). — a'jnm] Gn. d^jtii.
The former is the true reading, supported in Gn. by some Heb. MSS.
(Gin.) and (6 and accepted by Ball {SBOT.), Dill., Holz., et al.
8-16. The Hamites. — This passage is also without change
from Gn. los*- '3-'»'*; vv. »-' (P), «• '^-'^^ (J). The intervening
verses, Gn. lo^ the summary Gn. 10^-"= descriptive of the kingdom
and cities of Nirarod, are omitted as irrelevant in a brief outline.
Geographically the Hamites w^ere south and south-w^est of Palestine
and included also the so-called Canaanite peoples of Palestine. —
8. Cush} (Gn. 10* and frequent elsewhere) (see vv. ^ ') the land
and people of upper Egypt, commonly called Ethiopia. — Mizraim]
Egypt. The Hebrew word is usually accepted as a dual referring
to upper and lower Egvpt, though also regarded simply as a loca-
tive form {EBi. HI. col. 3161). — Put'\ (Gn. io« Je. 46' Ez. 27'° 30^
38^ Na. 3' f), usually reckoned as the Libyans (so rendered by (^
in Je. and Ez.) but more probably the Punt of the Egyptian in-
scriptions, the district of the African coast of the Red Sea, "from
the desert east of upper Egypt to the mod. Somali country"
(W. Max Miiller in DB.). — Canaan'\ reckoned as a son of Ham
because so long under Egyptian control and from the religious
antagonism of Israel toward the Canaanites. — 9. The sons of
Cush], as the notes below show, were located on the Red Sea and
eastward in Arabia. This might imply a migration from Africa
across the straits into Arabia. — Seba] (Gn. 10" Ps. 72"' Is. 43^ f),
formerly after Josephus identified with Meroe between the Nile
and the river Atbara, but more recently after indications by Strabo,
with a district on the west shore of the Red Sea. — Havilah] (Gn.
2" lo'- " 25'' I S. 15^ I Ch. I" 1). These passages require several
Havilahs or they indicate the uncertain geographical knowledge of
the ancients regarding southern Arabia and Africa. As repre-
sented here it may be on the African coast, a little south of the
straits of Bab-el-Mandeb (Dr. Gti.), or Havilah is a large central
and north-eastern Arabian district of which sometimes one part is
referred to and sometimes another {EBi. II. col. 1974). — Sabtah]
(Gn. 10' f) probably to be connected with the old Arabian town
Sabata, an ancient trading emporium, the capital of Hadramaut. —
I. 8-16.] DESCENDANTS OF HAM 63
Ranm] (Gn. 10' Ez. 27" •[) in Ez. associated with Sheba and
thus without doubt a district of Arabia (the 'Va^ixavnai of
Strabo). — Sahtecd'\ unknown but to be sought in Vabia. —
Sheba'\ (Gn. 10" mentioned frequently) the weahhy district or
people of south-western Arabia famous for traders. — Dedan] (Gn.
10' also mentioned frequently). The references point to both
northern and southern Arabia, due most likely to the extension of
the trade of the people who were probably a tribe of central or
southern Arabia. The name occurs in Sabean and Minean in-
scriptions.— 10. Cush]. The original writer of Gn. probably
thought Cush represented Ethiopia. Many modern writers, how-
ever, think of a Cush representing the Kasshii of the Assyrian
inscriptions, the ^oaaaloL of the Greek writers, a predatory
and warlike tribe dwelling in the mountains of Zagros near Elam,
who were so influential that they provided Babylon with its third
dynasty of kings for some five and a half centuries, beginning about
the middle of the eighteenth century B.C. — Nimrod] (Gn. 10^
Mi. 5" f) not yet clearly identified. Two theories prevail con-
cerning him: (i) that he is a historical character, most likely Nazi-
maraddash, one of the later Kassite kings (c. 1350 B.C.) (Haupt,
Andover Rev. 1884, Jul. p. 94, Sayce, Pal. Pal. pp. 91, 269); (2)
that he is the same as the mythological Babylonian hero Gil-
gamesh (KAT.^ p. 581). — 11. And Egypt begat]. The change of
form of expression is due to the use of the document J by the
compiler of Genesis. — Ludiin] (Gn. 10" Je. 46', sg. Ez. 30'^). In
the last two of these passages this people is mentioned with Cush
and Put (see v. «). Otherwise than thus a people of Egyptian or
adjoining territory, they are unknown and have not been identified.
— Anamim] (Gn. lo'^ ■\) not yet identified. — LeJiabiiu] (Gn.
10" f) equivalent to Lubim, the Libyans (Na. 3" 2 Ch. 12' 16*
Dn. 11^3 f), who dwelt on the western border of Egypt. — Naph-
tuhim] (Gn. 10" f) not yet definitely explained or identified
(for conjectures see EBi. II. col. 1697). — 12. Pathrusim] (Gn.
iC* f) the people of Pathros (Is. 11" Je. 44'- "> Ez. 29'^ 30'* f),
upper Egypt. The word is an Egyptian compound meaning
south-land. — Cashluhim] unidentified. — The following clause,
from 'whence the Philistines went forth, is misplaced. It should
64 I CHRONICLES
follow Caphlorim, the people of Caphtor, since that country is re-
peatedly mentioned as the ancient home of the Philistines (Am.
9' Dt. 2'' Je. 47^), see further textual note. Caphtor is usually
identified with Crete yet also and perhaps with more probability
with the southern coast of Asia Minor, called by the Egyptians
Kef to (see EBi. III. col. 3715). In either case its people are
children of Egypt through political relationship of the Philistines
with Egypt. — 13. Sidon his first born\ Sidon was later eclipsed
by Tyre, but its original greater prominence is seen in the fact that
when Tyre had gained a reputation the Phoenicians were still
called Sidonians (Dt. 39 Jos. 13M K. ii^ 16''). — Heth] (frequent
in Gn.) represents the Hittites, the Cheta of Egyptian monu-
ments and Hatti of the Assyrian, who from 1600 to 700 B.C. were
an independent power north and north-east of Palestine with
centres at Kedesh on the Orontes and Carchemish on the Eu'
phrates. Offshoots of this northern nation seem to have settled
at Hebron and elsewhere in Palestine. Any ethnic connection
of the Hittites with the Canaanites is uncertain. Jastrow (EBi. II.
col. 2094) regards Heth in Gn. as a gloss. — 14. This verse with
vv. '^ ' , giving various Canaanitic peoples, is a supplementary
addition to J in Gn. (SBOT. Oxf. Hex., Gu., Dr., et al). For
similar enumerations cj. Gn. 1519-21 Ex. 3* i' 13= 2325 " 0^2 ^^u
Dt. 7' 20'^ Jos. 3'" 9' ii^ 128 2411. — The Jebusite] the tribe
anciently inhabiting Jerusalem (Jos. 15^ ^a 2 S. 5^', et al., men-
tioned frequently). — The Amorite] (very frequent) with a double
usage: (i) the people ruled by Sihon east of the Jordan, Nu. 21 '3,
et al.; (2) the pre-Israelitish people west of the Jordan, a usage
especially in E and D (Dr. Dt. p. 11), very frequent also in the
inscriptions — in Amarna letters, northern Palestine, in Assyrian
inscriptions the land of the Hebrew kingdoms and in general " the
West" (EBi. I. col. 641). (On an early Amoritic Semitic in-
vasion both of Babylonia and Palestine, see Pa. EHSP. pp. 25^:)
The Amorite is a racial name while Canaanite is a geographical
name, and thus the two become general designations of the pre-
Israelitish inhabitants of Palestine (Dr. Gn. p. 126). — The Gir-
gashite] (Gn. io'« 15=1 Dt. 71 Jos. 3'° 24" Ne. 9' f)- Their lo-
cation is uncertain. — 15. The Hivite] mentioned frequently and
I. 17-23.] DESCENDANTS OF SHEM 65
usually taken as a petty people of central Palestine connected
with Gibeon, Jos. 9' 11'', also with Shechem, Gn. 34-, with Her-
mon, Jos. II', and Mt. Lebanon, Ju. 3=. Perhaps in these last
two passages Hittites should be read {EBi. II. col. 2101). The
following five names do not occur in other lists and are geograph-
ical, representing the inhabitants of five cities of northern Palestine.
— The Arkile] of Arka, mentioned frequently in Assy. ins. and a
city of importance in the Roman period, the birthplace of Alexan-
der Severus (a.d. 222-235), the mod. Tell Arka, about tw^elvc miles
north of Tripolis {EBi. I. col. 310). — The Siiiiie] of a place not
positively located but appearing in the Assy. ins. SLinmc grouped
with Arka (EBi. IV. col. 4644). — 16. The Arvadite] of Arvad
(Ez. 27* "), mentioned in the Amarna letters and frequently in
Assy, ins., the mod. Riud, twenty-five miles north of Arka (Baed.*
p. 354). — The Zeinarites] (Gn. 10" f) of a city or fortress Simirra,
mentioned frequently in Amarna letters as Siimiir and Assy, ins.,
known to the Greeks, the mod. Summ (Baed." p. 351), six miles
south of Arvad. — The Hamathite] of the wdl-known and fre-
quently mentioned Hamath on the Orontes, fifty miles east-north-
east of Arvad, mod. Hama (Baed.'' pp. 36S/.).
9. N-DD ] Gn. 10' n-aoi. — N->n-] Gn. nr:>-ii. — 10. in-] (6 -1-
Ki;cTj76s = T-s is probably a gloss from Gn. lo'. — 11-23. These vv.
are wanting in <§^ (v. s.). — 11. D^^ii^] Qr. 0'~^'-', Kt. a-.-yr. Ki.
prefers the latter on the basis of <$''^, but D^ . is transliterated in the
same manner else>vhere. — 12. u^r'^^D ayv) iNi'i i-'X a^ir^D^ rx ]. This
transposition seems required by Am. 9' Dt. 2^3 Je. 47^ and, in spite of
all the Vrss. giving the present order, is regarded as the original in
Gn. io» by Dill, and Ball (SBOT.), not, however, by Holz. Ki.
assumes it to have been the original order in our text, but it is more
probable that the Chronicler had our present Gn. text before him.
17-23. — The Semites. — These verses, wanting in (^^ and
placed by Ki. as a subsequent addition (but v. s.), were taken orig-
inally without change from Gn. lo--", vv. " f (Ch. v.") P, vv.
"•" (Ch. vv. '8") J. The Semites geographically were, in the
main, in a central zone between the Japhethites and the Hamites.
Political considerations and a knowledge of racial affinities as well
as the geographical situation may have influenced their grouping.
5
66 I CHRONICLES
— 17. Elam] mentioned frequently in Assy. ins. Elama, Elamma,
Elamtu, and in the OT. (Gn. lo" 14'- ' Is. 11" 21^ 22« Je. 25"
4Q31.39 (seven times) Ez. 32=^ Dn. 8^), a land and people east of Baby-
lonia, lying directly at the head of the Persian Gulf to the north
and east. Civilisation early flourished there, and about the
twenty-third century b. c. an Elamitic suzerainty was exercised
over Babylonia. Racially the Elamites were entirely distinct from
the Semites. Their inclusion among the Semites was due either
to their proximity to Assyria (Dr. Gn.) or because in very early
times the land was peopled in part at least b}'^ Semites (Del.
Par. p. 321). — Asshiir'\ the kingdom and people of Assyria, fre-
quent in inscriptions and OT., situated in the upper portion of
the Alesopotamian valley about the middle course of the Tigris.
The people were closely akin to the Phoenicians, Arameans, and
Hebrews. As conquerors from the fourteenth to the eighth cen-
turies B.C. they have well been called the Romans of the East. —
Arpachshad] (w. '«• " Gn. lo- " jjio.is -j-) obscure, formerly
identified with 'Appa7ra)(tTL'i (Ptol. vi. i. 2), the hill country of
the upper Zab, in Assy. ins. Arrapha (Del. Par. pp. 124 /.),
Arbaha (Sch. COT. I. p. 97), but this does not explain the final
syllable; hence a compound of C]"lS=Arabic Si. I "boundary"
and Keshed = Chaldeans, hence boundary or land of the Chalde-
ans (Sch. COT. I. p. 98); or after the Assyrian Arba-kisddi,
" land of the four sides or directions " (Del. Par. p. 256) ; or of four
banks, i.e., of Tigris and Euphrates (Jen. ZA. xv, p. 256); or a
contraction of Ar = Ur, the ancient home of x\braham and pa
the Egyptian article and Keshed, i.e., Arpachshad, Ur of the
Chaldeans (Horn. AHT. p. 292); or a contraction through
copyist's error of ■]S"iS representing Arrapha, etc. (see above)
and Keshed, the passage having originally read Elam and Asshur
and Arpach and Keshed (Cheyne, EBi. I. col. 318). This last
would be the most plausible were it not for the appearance of
Arpachshad in Gn. ii'"-". — Lud] (Gn. lo^^ Is. 66'» Ez. 27'" 30^ f)
naturally Lydians of Asia Minor, Assy. Luddu, also obscure since
it is difficult to see why in this connection they should be men-
tioned between Arpachshad and Aram, and they were not at all a
Semitic people. Jensen would identify them with a land of
I. 17-23.] DESCENDANTS OF SHEM 67
Luddu mentioned in Assy. ins. and apparently on the upper
Tigris {Deutsche Lit. Ztg. 1899, No. 24, v. Gu. Gn.). — Aram]
frequent in OT. and ins.; not a land, rather the name of a
Semitic people dwelling north-east of Palestine widely spread.
Their inscriptions of the eighth century B.C. have been found at
Zenjirli in the extreme north of Syria, and inscriptions at Tema,
north of Medina, show them to have been in north-western Arabia
about 500 B.C. Other inscriptions show them to have been on the
lower Tigris and Euphrates. Indeed, in Babylonia and Assyria a
large portion of the population, if not the larger, was probably
Aramean at a very early date. But their especial land was
Mesopotamia, yet while the Assy. ins. never place them west of
the Euphrates, that was their home par excellence in the OT.
They are distinguished by special names as " Aram of the two
rivers" (Gn. 24"> Dt. 233 <<> Ju. 38) (rivers uncertain, naturally
the Euphrates and Tigris, but according to some the Euphrates
and Chabor), "Aram of Damascus" (2 S. S^), "Aram of Zobah"
(: S. io«- s). From their position or other causes their language
became widespread, both as a language of commerce and
diplomacy (Is. 36"), and after the exile it supplanted Hebrew as
the language of the Jews (Noeldeke, EBi. I. col. 276/.).— The
four following peoples or districts are in Gn. the sons of Aram,
which statement was probably originally here {v. i.). — 'Uz]
(v. ^2 Gn. 2221 36=8 Jb. I' Je. 25-" La. 4=' f). The connection
here and in Gn. 22=', where Uz is a son of Nahor, suggests a
people or district to the north-east of Palestine, while its appearance
in the list of the Horites (Gn. 36") and in connection with Edom
(La. 4=') suggests a tribe or locality south-east of Palestine. The
name has not yet been clearly identified in the Assy. ins. (but
see Del. Par. p. 259). — Hiil] (Gn. 10" •]•) unidentified although
possibly to be seen in HalVa (Del. Par. p. 259), a district near Mt.
Masius. — Gether] (Gn. lo" f) unidentified. — Meshech] in Gn.
10" Mash f, which is without doubt the true reading, representing
the district of Mt. Masius. (On Meshech see v. ^)— 18. Shelah]
(v. 24 Gn. 10=^ ii>2- "■ »• 15 f). Cf. V. K Since Shelah is the second
element of Methuselah {cf. v. '), it is probably the name of a god.
{Cf. Mez, Gesch. d. Stadt Harran, p. 23, v. Gu. on Gn. 11 '2.) —
68 I CHRONICLES
Eber] an eponym simply derived from Hebrews ("'"'iSy) or from
the geographical term indicating the early home of the Hebrews
"beyond the river," i.e., the Euphrates (Jos. 24* '■) or Jordan,
cf. "beyond the Jordan " (jTiTt "I2J?) Gn. so'"- " Jos. 17^ Dt.
I'' et al. (some thirty times), BDB. — 19. Peleg] (v. " Gn. io«
11I6. 17. 18. 19 -j-) derivation and representation uncertain. Sayce
connects with the Babylonian palgu, "a canal," and makes the
land Babylonia divided by canals (Expos. T. viii. p. 258).
Hommel compares the land of el aflag in central Arabia (Gu. Gn.).
Usually the division of the land is interpreted as referring to the
dispersion of population, Gn. 9" lo'^ 11'. — Joklan]. This ap-
pears in the primitive tribe Kuhhu of Arabian genealogists, but
this fact is usually assumed to be derived from the OT. and thus of
no historical value. The name then in its Biblical origin is still
entirely obscure, but the thirteen sons, vv. ="=3, are clearly Arabian
tribes or localities, only a few of whom can now be definitely
identified. — 20. Almodjd] unidentified, a compound possibly of
hi> "God" and "nii2 fr. 1~T either active or passive God loves
or is loved (BDB.), or the word means the family Maudad in ins.,
especially the Gebanites in their relation to the kings of Ma'in
(Gl. Skiz. ii. p. 425). It is possibly to be connected with places in
Hadramaut (see Holz. Gn.). — Sheleph] appears in tribal and
local names Sale/, Salf, near Yemen (Gl. ib.). — Hazarmaveth]
mentioned in Sab. ins. and preserved in the mod. Hadramaut,
the name of a district in southern Arabia a little east of Aden. —
Jerah] (Gn. 10" f) not clearly identified (but see Gl. ib.). — 21.
Hadoram] (Gn. 10", in i Ch. iS'" 2 Ch. lo'^ names of persons).
Possibly Dauram in the neighbourhood of San a. — Uzal'\ (Gn. 10"
Ez. 27'8 f) generally identified with Sand, capital of Yemen.
Glaser disputes this and seeks it near Medina {EBi. IV. col.
5239, Gl. Skiz. ii. pp. 427 ff.). — Diklah] (Gn. 10" f) uniden-
tified.— 22. 'Ebal] ('Obal Gn. lo^') usually connected with the
local name Abil in Yemen. — Abima'el] (Gn. lo'^ f) unidentified.
— Sheba]. See v. '. Perhaps here a colony of the main people
is meant. — 23. Ophir] (Gn. lo^s). Whether this Ophir is the
same as the land of gold and the terminus of the voyages of
Solomon's fleet is uncertain. BDB. regards it as an entirely
I. 17-23.] DESCENDANTS OF SHEM 69
distinct place. Others identify the two and place Ophir on the
eastern coast of Arabia stretching up the Persian Gulf (EBi. III.
col. 3513 ff.). — Havilah]. See v. \ This must be a Havilah con-
nected with the district in Arabia. — Jobab] (Gn. 10", elsewhere
name of a person, cf. 1^^) generally regarded as unidentified.
Glaser discusses the sons of Joktan with the following conclusion :
"Almodad, Shalaf, Hadramaut, and Jarah represent the entire
southern coast of Arabia from Bab-el-Mandeb to beyond Mahra;
Hadoram, Uzal, and Diklah the Serat range from San'a to Medina;
Obal, Abimael, and Sheba the Tihama from 'Asir and from
Hidjaz (eventually from Yemen) and the Sabderland ; Ophir,
Hawilah, and Jobab, eastern and central Arabia unto 'Asir-
Hidjaz" {Skiz. ii. pp. 435/-)-
17. DiNi] (&^ (= <&) and Gn. 10=' + D"»>< ''J31, which should be sup-
plied (and the following i dropped), since these words have probably
fallen from the text by a copyist's error (Ki., Bn.), although it is pos-
sible that the Chronicler assumed that the relation of Uz, etc., to Aram
would be understood, and hence the omission, cf. v. ■• (Be., Ke., Zoe.,
Oe.). S 1^t1'i•D^N1 for fiyi is doubtless a corruption of ^Ni'V oiNi before
which ^J3 must have fallen out. — "l^^'ri] six mss., ^, and Gn. t'r.r A
district Mash appears well attested by the cuneiform inscriptions,
nrn appears in v. ^ Gn. lo^ Ps. 120% and from greater familiarity
was probably inadvertently substituted by a copyist (Bn.), yet
perhaps already in the Chronicler's text of Ga since (& there
has Mocrox- — 18. "i'^^'] (^'^^ + tov Yiaivav koll 'Kaiva.v eyevvriaev as
(B of Gn. lo^i. This plus is certainly not original here. Note the
addition of Kaivav in (&^ of v. =■•. — 20. nia-isn] (^^ Apafxwd, ^
Acrepjxud, H Asarmoth. Ptolemy (vi. 7. 25) and Strabo (xvi. 4. 2)
speak of XarpafiuiTiTai and Xarpa/xCoTai., and Sabean inscriptions write
rciJn alongside of niDiin {ZDMG. xix. pp. 239^^., xxxi. 74 ff.), hence Ki.
{SBOT.) points piD — or nin — cf. ni.n^x and mc'i'S. Since mmsn is a
foreign word and as such might have been changed by the Hebrews in
order to provide it with a meaning, and since riri might well have
been transliterated p-uO by Greeks, Ki. now (Kom.) retains pointing
of JH.— 22. 73';:.] Gn. lo^s Sav-
The descendants of Japheth are fourteen, of Ham (omitting
Nimrod), thirty, and of Shem, twenty-six, making seventy in all,
representing the seventy nations of the globe which played an
70 I CHRONICLES
important part in Jewish thought. CJ. also the occurrence of
seventy in Nu. ii'« Lk. lo' ^ .
24-27. The descent of Abram from Shem. — Abridged from
Gn. ii'»-" (P) by retention of the names of the patriarchs only, f/.
vv. •-^ This list in the priestly document was clearly designed to
bridge over a period of considerable length of which there was
nothing to record. The names appear to be derived from tribes
or places, or possibly in some instances from deities (see Shelah,
Reu, and Terah), and also some are found in the older list of J
(Gn. io='- " and see above, vv. '^ ' ). — Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah,
'Eber, Peleg] (see w. "• "• 's. 19). — Reu] (Gn. ii'^- is- :o. n -j-)
probably the name of a god {EBi. IV. col. 4087, cf. Mez above,
v. '8). — Seriig] (Gn. ii^" 21- « 23 -j-) a district and city, Sarugi in
Assy, ins., near Haran, well kno-\Mi to Arabic and Syriac writers of
the Middle Ages. — Nahor] (Gn. 11", etc., fifteen times, Jos. 24').
The name of a deity (Jen. ZA. xi. p. 300, Skipwith, JQR. xi.p.254)
and also without doubt a tribe w-hose city was Haran. — Tera}i\
(Gn. II"- =5. 26. 27. 28. 31. 32 Jog, 34= f) identified with an ancient
deity (Tarhu, Tnirgu) whose worship was widespread in north-
em Mesopotamia and adjoining districts and whose name has
been preserved apparently in the element rapK of many Cilician
Greek names (Jen. ZA. vi. p. 70, Hittiter, p. 153). — 27. Abram
that is Abraham]. In the narratives of Gn. the progenitor of
Israel is first knowm as Abram (11 26-1 7 5) until (17°) his name
is changed to Abraham, and henceforward he is knowTi by the
latter name. The name Abram is equivalent to Abiram, "the
(divine) father is lofty," and Abraham is only another way of
spelling the name, although it is possible that two persons, of the
two different names, may have been fused into one, "Abram a
local hero of the region of Hebron" and "Abraham the collective
name of a group of Aramean people, including not only the He-
braic clans but also the Ishmaelites and a number of other desert
tribes" (Pa. EHSP. p. 41). The historical character of Abraham
is maintained by Ewald {Hist. i. pp. 300 ff.), Kittel {Gesch.
i. § 16), Cornill {Hist. People 0/ Is. p. 34), Hommel {AHT.
pp. 146/.), McCurdy {HPM. §§ 444-448), Ryle (in DB.), and
others, but the basis for this belief seems somewhat sentimental.
I. 24-33.] ABRAHAM, ISHMAEL, AND KETURAH 7 1
Abraham's character is a creation of the prophetic period and he
seems to have been created to connect together the peoples kindred
to Israel in a genealogical system of relationship. It is possible
that he came from an ancient deity worshipped in southern Judah,
especially at Hebron. A suggestive name for this deity is seen in
Ram (Dl) lofty {cf. " Ely on " most high, Gn. 14"). A southern
Judean clan bore the name of Ram (2"). Sarah (princess), the
wife of Abraham, has been clearly identified as a goddess (Jen.
ZA. xi. p. 299).
24. Ki. after his view of (&^ inserts ''J3 before ac- {v. s.). — 27.
Nin D-I3S] v.-anting in <&^ and so omitted by Bn., but original (S
probably supported ^ {cf. (S*i^').
28-33. Sons of Abraham, Ishmael, and Keturah.— 28. The
sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael]. This statement has no
exact parallel in form in Genesis. Isaac, although the younger,
is mentioned first, since Israel came from him. Vv. "-3' are con-
densed from Gn. 25'2-i«^ (P) and vv. ^2-33 from Gn. 252-^ (J). The
change of order from that of Genesis introducing the sons of
Ishmael before those of Keturah is noticeable. — Isaac] probably
represents a tribe whose original name may have been Isaac-el
(^S'pni"') corresponding to Ishmael, Israel, etc. This tribe
seems to have dwelt in southern Judah, since the home of the
patriarch is placed there. Why the tribe should form a link in the
genealogy and become prominent in the story is not clearly known.
The relationship between Israel and Edom clearly demanded for
both a common father, and he might well be seen in an ancient
tribe which had been absorbed into both. A deity has been found
also in Isaac through the expression "Fear [of] Isaac" (Gn.
31" ") (Luther, ZAW. xxi. p. 73). — Ishmael] (Gn. i6"- '5- '«e/ al.)
ihe personification and without doubt the ancient historical name
of a group of tribes regarded as near kinsmen of Israel dwelling in
the northern part of the Sinaitic Peninsula and, according to the
sons mentioned below, extending further into Arabia. — Nebaioth]
(Gn. 25'3 28' 36' Is. 60' t), and Kedar] (Gn. 25'^ Is. 21'^ 42" 60'
Je. 2'° 49" Ez. 272' f). Both of these tribes are mentioned in
72 I CHRONICLES
Assy. ins. among the conquests of Ashurbanipal (Del. Par. pp.
296/., 299). The latter appears the more widely spread and
prominent; both dwelt at some distance east of Edom and
Moab' and the latter at the time of Ashurbanipal extended up to
the Hauran. Whether the Nebaioth were the later Nabateans is
uncertain. (See EBi. III. col. 3254.). — Adhbe'el] (Gn. 2,^'^ f) also
in Assy. ins. with home south-west of the Dead Sea toward the
Egyptian frontier (Del. Par. p. 301). — Mibsam] (Gn. 25", also in
the genealogy of Simeon i Ch. 4" ■\) not mentioned elsewhere. —
30. Mishma ] (Gn. 25'^, likewise in the genealogy of Simeon
I Ch. 4=5 26 1) possibly the name is preserved in Jehel Misma', one
hundred and sixty miles east of Teima, or in another Jebel
Misma one hundred and twenty miles north-west of it (Dill.,
see Dr. Gn. p. 242). — Dumah] (Gn. 25" Is. 21". perhaps there
Edom, Jos. 15" in Judah, where we should probably read Rumah
f) the oasis Duma now usually called dl-Jof, on the southern
border of the Syrian desert, mentioned by Ptolemy and Arabic
geographers (Dr. ib.). — Massa] (Gn. 25'* f) in Assy. ins. and
located near the Nebaioth (Del. Par. pp. 302 /.). — Hadad] (Gn.
25'5) not identified. — Tema] (Gn. 25'* Jb. 6" Is. 2i'< Je. 25" -j-)
mod. Teima, south-east from the northern end of the Elamitic
Gulf.— 31. Jdur and Naphish] (Gn. 25'^ i Ch. s'^ q. v. f).—
Kedmah]{Gn. 25'^ f) not identified.— 32. Ketiirah] (Gn. 25'- <
f). The name means "frankincense" and might appropriately
be chosen as the name of the mother of tribes trading in or
producing that commodity. The sons of Keturah were tribes
dwelling east and south-east of Israel which the Hebrew historian
recognised as kin to Israel but held them less closely related than
those called Ishmaelites {v. s.), and hence the Chronicler called
their mother a concubine, a term not used of her in Gn., or else
from the feeling that Sarah properly was Abraham's only wife. —
Zimran] (Gn. 252 -j-) usually connected with the city Zabram
(Ptol. vi. 7. 5) west of Mecca on the Red Sea. As a tribal
name it may have been derived from Zemer (iDT), mountain goat.
Very likely the same people appear in the "Zimri" (Je.
2S''^).—Jokshan] (Gn. 25=- ^ -j-) unkno^vn. — Medmt] (Gn. 25^ |).
Comparisons of doubtful worth have been made with a Wady
I. 24-33.] ABRAHAM, ISHMAEL, AND KETURAH 73
Medan near Dedan and with a Yemenite god Madan (EBl. III. col.
3002). This probably is not a real name but has arisen by a
copyist's error from the following word. — Midian] (Gn. 252 and
frequently) a well-known people early disappearing from history,
dwelling east of the Gulf of Akaba, whose nomad branches
made forays into Edom (Gn. 36" Nu. 22^ ') and across Gilead
into Palestine (Ju. 6-8). The name Midian appears in MoBiava
on or near the Gulf of 'Akaba (Ptol. vi. 7. 2), mod. Madyan
(EBl. III. col. 3081). — Jisbak] (Gn. 25^ -j-) unidentified unless
with Yasbak, a district in northern Syria mentioned in Assy. ins.
{KB. I. p. i5g).—Sln{ah] (Gn. 252 f) the tribe of Job's friend
Bildad (Jb. 2"). This has been identified with Suhu of the
Assy, ins., a district on the Euphrates near Haran, but this is
doubtful. — Sheba and Dedan]. Cf. v. ^ Different sources give
different genealogical relationships. The Chronicler has here
omitted from his source the sons of Dedan, given in Gn. 25'''. —
33. 'Ephah] (Gn. 25^ Is. 6o% cf. in Judah and Caleb i Ch. 2'^ '•)
probably the Hayapa, a north Arabian tribe mentioned in Assy.
ins. (Del. Par. p. 304). It dwelt in the district of Midian
(Noeldeke, EBi. III. col. ^oSi). — EpJier] (Gn. 25% name
in genealogy of Judah i Ch. 4'^ Manasseh 5=* f) possibly a dit-
tography of the previous 'Ephah. This tribe and the three fol-
lowing, Hanoch, Abida , and Elda'ah (Gn. 25* f except Hanoch
cf. V. ', a Reubenite 5^), have not yet been clearly identified.
(Cf Gl. Skiz. p. 449-)
28-31 . This condensation has retained of Gn. 25'2- i^'^ only the first
two words nn"?in n"?wS, the suffix o— also being added, opn'^in. Vv.
29b-3i follow the text of Gn. 25'3b-i6a to n^.si almost exactly. — 29. "'NDini]
so too Gn. 25", but (S ^a^e{ai)T]\ in both places.— 30. T.Z'r.] Gn. 25'^ 't\
— syz] Gn. 'Ci. — -nn] some Mss. i^n. Gn. 25'= the same as Ch., but
there many mss. Tin.— «d>-'] (§ Qaifxav.— 31. nsip] s'^ anj.- 32-33,
m'?' Dn-\3K B'.j'?'i3] have no direct verbal parallel in Gn. The remainder
of w. M-33 follow the text of Gn. 25"', beginning with pci pn, except that
PiT" ^J3i is substituted for i'?'' P'P''1 and after j-ni are omitted vn p-i ^J3i
D"'Cn'^i D''B'rJ'?i mirvS. H adds these words, so also <J5a plus TayovtjX
Ktti Na/JSatrjX after Kai vloi AaiSav, following (g of Gn. 25'. The
Chronicler probably omitted the clause since icx is a son of db'
according to v. "•
74 I CHRONICLES
34-42. The sons of Isaac and Esau, including the sons of
Seir. — V. " has no exact verbal parallel in Genesis; v." is con-
densed from Gn. 36^ ^"; v. =« from Gn. 361'- ^^% where Timna' is
described as the concubine of Eliphaz and mother of Amalek; v. "
is taken verbatim from Gn. 36'"'; vv. =8-" are taken verbatim,
with slight omissions, from Gn. 3620-28 (P). — 34, 'Esau] (Gn.
25" ' "«''•, frequent in Gn.) identified with Edom (Gn. 36'- « 's);
ancestor of the Edomites, Gn. 36^ " (r/". v. ^5); "probably orig-
inally a god whom the Edomites regarded as their ancestor"
(Noeldeke, EBi. II. col. 1182). — Israel]. In Gn. the second son
of Isaac was primarily called Jacob (Gn. 25==). Israel is the
name given later in connection with a special revelation (Gn.
2 228 351'^). The Chronicler prefers Israel to Jacob in speaking
of the people (9') and so the OT. writers generally. Jacob is more
poetic. The truth lying back of the two names is probably that
an older tribe, Jacob or Jacob-el, was fused into Israel. — 35.
Cf. Gn. 36^ 5% where the mothers of the sons are given: Adah
of Eliphaz and Basemath of Re'u'el and Oholibamah of Jeush,
Ja'lam, and Korah. — Eliphaz] (Gn. 36^ « , one of Job's friends
Jb. 2" et al.) from Teman v. ^\ — Re'u^el] (Gn. 36* » , Moses'
father-in-law Ex. 2^^ Nu. lo^", a Gadite Nu. 2", a Benjaminite
I Ch. 98). For the first half of the name cf. v."K — Jeush] (Gn.
365", a personal name i Ch. y'" 8" 23"'- " 2 Ch. 11"). — Ja'lam]
(Gn. 365- " >8 I). — Korah] both personal and clan or guild
name in Israel doubtless historically showing a connection with
Edom {cf. 2" 9'3). — 36. (Cf Gn. 36".) — Teman] is elsewhere
in OT. the name of a district in northern Edom (Am. 112 Je. 49'- 20
Ez. 25" Hb. 3', the home of Job's friend Jb. 2'i cf. i Ch. I's).—
Omar] (Gn. 36"- "^ ]).~Zcphi] (Zapho Gn. 36" -^ -)-).— Ga'/aw]
(Gn. 36" '6 ■)■). — Kenaz]. Cf. v. ", elsewhere connected with Caleb
(Jos. 15'^ Ju. I" y- ") showing that the Calebites were closely
allied with the Edomites. — Timna'] in Gn. 3612 the concubine of
Eliphaz and the mother of Amalek. In Gn. 3622 i Ch. i^s Timna
is the sister of Lotan, and in Gn. 36^° i Ch. i^' chief or clan of
Edom. These variations are not surprising considering the origin
of genealogies. Gunkel regards Gn. 36'2'' as an insertion in P. —
Amelek] an ancient people south of Canaan, and marauders
I. 34-42.] DESCENDANTS OF ESAU 75
(Nu. 24'" Ju. 3" et al.). Their place in Gn. 36'= as a subordinate
clan of Esau points to their later position of inferiority or extinc-
tion (r/. I Ch. 4").— 37. These clans from Gn. 36" are otherwise
unknown. But as the names of other clans or individuals cf.
Nahath 6"<26) 2 Ch. 31", Zerah 2* 4^* 6« 9' 2 Ch. 148 (»', Shammah
I S. 16^ 2 S. 23'- =S probably i Ch. 27' (BDB.). All of these
sons of Eliphaz and Reu'el are given in Gn. 36'^ »• as chiefs
of Edom; and also in Gn. t,6^^ Jensh, Ja'lam, and Korah. —
38. Seir] in Gn. 362" called the Horite, showing that the writer
there had in mind the earlier inhabitants of the land of Edom.
Hence they properly are sons of the country Seir rather than of
the race Edom. Seir, the territorial name meaning "hairy," is
probably equivalent to "wooded," "covered with brushwood."
The name appears in the Saaira of the Egyptian inscriptions
{EBi. II. coll. 1182/.).— Lotow] (Gn. 362»- " f) possibly to be con-
nected with Lot (Gn. 11=' i2< et al.), derived from the ancient
name of the country east of the Jordan; in Egyptian inscriptions
Ruten, Liitcn (Pa. EHSP. pp. 38, 59, 123).— 5// 06a/] (v. ^° Gn.
36"- " ", in Caleb 2^°- ", in Judah 4'- ^ f ). On meaning of name
as young lion cf. Gray, HPN. p. 109. — Zibeon] (v. ■"> Gn. 362-
14. 20. 24. 29 -j-)_ The name means hyena (Gray, HPN. p. 95). —
'Anah] (v. ^^ Gn. 362- »■ '»• 2°- ^i- 25- 29 ■)•). The present text of Gn.
gives Anah (36^) a daughter of Zibeon and (36-0 a son of
Zibeon. — Dishon] (Gn. 36'-', son of Anah 36"- " i Ch. i"- '\
chief Gn. 363° ■\). The name means pygarg, a kind of antelope
or gazelle {cf. Dt. 14^).— £zcr] (v. ^^ Gn. 362'- 27. ^<^ ^).—Dishan]
(v."' Gn. 36==' '■'8. so I) clearly a mere variant of Dishon. — 39.
Lotan]. Cf. v. ". — Hori] (Gn. 36", a Simeonite Nu. it,^ f). As
a clan name this is striking. Perhaps originally in Gn. it was
the Gentilic adjective. (On meaning cf. Dr. Dt. 2'\). — Homam]
(Hemam Gn. 36^2 -f). This name possibly has connection with
Heman 2« since Zerah was Edomitic as well as Judaic, cf. v. ".
—Timna']. Cf. v. ''. — 40. Shobal]. Cf. v. ^K—Aljan] ('Alwan
Gn. 36" ■\) possibly to be compared with 'Eljon, the Most
High, the name of a deity. — Manahath] (Gn. 36" f). Cf. i Ch.
2" 8« but probably vdth no connection with the foregoing. — Ebal]
(Gn. 36^' f). Cf. with possible identification in name (not
y6 I CHRONICLES
locality) with 'Ebal of i".—Shephi] (Shcpho Gn. 36" f)- Q"-
for meaning "'Sw' bareness, bare height. — Onam] (Gn. 36", a
chief of Judah i Ch. 2^^- "f). Probably the name is identical
with Onan, Gn. 38^ i Ch. 2\—Zibeon]. Cf. v. ^\—Aijah] (Gn.
36", father of Rizpah 2 S. 3' 21"- '"■ " f) meaning hawk, cf. Lv.
II'* Dt. 14". — 'Anah]. Cf. v.". Gn. 362* adds: "This is Anah
who found the hot springs ( ?) in the wilderness, as he fed the
asses of Zibeon his father."— 41. 'Aitah]. Cf. v. '^.—
Dishon]. Cf. v. ^\—Hamran] (Hemdan Gn. 3628 f). The form
in Chronicles suggestive of m!2n he-ass, Hamor the father of
Shechem, considering the other animal names in this section, is not
improbably the true ont.—Eshban] (Gn. 36" '\).—Jithran] (Gn.
36", also man or clan of Asher i Ch. 7" f)- Q"- Jether, a common
noime.— Cher an] (Gn. 36" ^).—42. Ezer]. Cf v. ^\—Bilhan]
(Gn. 36", a Zebulunite i Ch. 7'" f). Some connect with Bilhali
the concubine of Jacob (Stade, Gesch. i. p. 146, A. j).—Zawan]
(Gn. 36" ■\).—Jaakan] ('Akan Gn. 36" f) perhaps arisen from
and Akan (jpVl) or possibly to be connected with "the sons of
Jaakan" Nu. ^3^' '■ Dt. io<^. —Dishan]. Cf v. '\--Uz]. Cf.
V. ". — Aran] (Gn. 36=8 -j-).
34. Snt:"'! YZ-;] (^^ 'IaKw/3 K. 'Hcrai/, ^ /foi Bcrav k. la/cwjS. The intro-
ductory /cat of the latter points to ^ as original (g. This is adopted by Ki.
and Bn. since the son of the promise, though the youngtr, |-,recedes in
V. 2s._36. ••sj] about thirty MSS. and Gn. 3611 las. (& here and in Gn.
Sw0ap = ifli. This may represent an ancient scribal error (n for i),
wherefore the reading of Gn. is probably original. — rjp] 05, g», S, Gn.
^6>> 'p^.— p'^::•;^ j!:r:-i] Gn. ^6^"- ^D•<'^i<h iSni yyy p id'SnS ifj'?^£) ."i.tti pcni
p'^:;y rx. ^" Kal rys Qafxva 'A^aXijK and ^ Qafiva 5e t; vaWaKT}
EXi0a^ ereKey avTt] (other MSS. ai^r^J) to;' Afia\i]K are doubtless
harmonising glosses, probably originating in (^. The te.xt of Ch. is not
likely a persistent variant as Bn. maintains. The Chronicler may have
misread Gn., taking ];:^:■^^ with the preceding as a niasc. name (cf. v. "
= Gn. 36'"') and reading the following, tltere was a concubine to
Eliphaz the son of Esau, and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek. — 37. m?]
Gn. 36'3 'Ti.— 38. ii:-"-!] (g and Gn. 36=' n instead of i, so Ki. SBOT.,
Ball, SBOT., on Gn. 3621. Ki. Kom. retains '^i.— 39. ncini] Gn.
3622 Kt. DCini, Qr. OD^rn. (5 in both places Al/xhv, hence Bn., Ki. BH.
OCO1.— 40. r>] many mss., (SS and Gn. 36" p'-y, adopted by Ki. and
Bn. — >pr] Gn. lor. (6^ Soj^ap, of which ^ Sw^ is probably a mu-
I, 43-54.] RULERS OF EDOM 77
tilation, = iDt:' = lor, v. s. v. '«. — 41. pu"i>] ^^^ + /cat EX(/3a/ia
Ovyar-np Ava, cf. Gn. 3626. — p-n] ^b 'Ejuepwc, aid Afjia5a(fjL). Many
MSS. and Gn. 3626 p^n, favoured by Ki. holding the root icn better
suited for a proper name. — 42 . ]p-;'] twenty-two MSS. and Gn. 362' jpyi
but read with (&'^^\ H, », ]n"\ cf. Nu. S3'"- Dt. lo^
A correspondence between the three lines of descent from Noah
through Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and the three Hnes from
Abraham through Isaac, Ishmael, and the sons of Keturah, has
been found. As the descendants of Noah appear in seventy
peoples, so likewise the descendants of Abraham may be reckoned
as seventy tribes, Ishmael furnishing twelve; Keturah, thirteen;
Isaac, two; Esau, si.xteen (five sons and eleven grandsons); Seir,
twenty-seven (including Timna v.") (Be.). Another reckoning
omits Timna (v. ") but includes Ishmael (Oe.). Others reject the
idea of seventy tribes having been designed by the Chronicler
(Ke., Zoe.). This latter appears quite probable.
43-51a. The kings of Edom.— Taken from Gn. 36"-" (J
generally but Dr. P). Since no king is the son of his predecessor
and their residences change, it is probable that these kings were
rulers and comparable to the judges in Israel or represented dif-
ferent dynasties frequently changed as in northern Israel. The
phrase before there reigned a king of the children of Israel (v. ")
may either mean before a king reigned in Israel, i.e., before Saul,
or before a king of Israel reigned over Edom, i.e., before the con-
quest of Edom by David (2 S. 8'^). This latter interpretation is
to be preferred (Buhl, Edomiler, p. 47, Dill., Holz., Gu.). — 43.
Bela the son of Be or]. The name is so similar to " Balaam the
son of Beor" (Nu. 22-24) th^t some have regarded the two per-
sons as identical {EBi. I. col. 524, Gray, Nu. p. 324). Bela also
son of Benjamin, 8', Reubenite 58. — Dinhabah] (Gn. 36^= f)
location unknown. — 44. Jobab] (Gn. 36-^', cf. v. ") otherwise
unknown.— Zera/z] Cf. v. ^■'.—Bozrah] (Gn. 36" Is. 34^ 63' Je.
4g'3- " Am. i'= f) mod. Busaireh, twenty miles south-east of
the Dead Sea and thirty-five miles north of Petra (Dr. Gn.). —
45. Husham] (Gn. 36^^ '• f cf. Hashum Ezr. 2" Ne. 7-).—
Teman]. Cf. v.^'.— 46. Hadad] (Gn. 36'^ ', cf. also vv." '•,
an Edomite who troubled Solomon i K. ii'^ « f) the name
78 I CHRONICLES
of an Aramean deity found in the names Ben-hadad, Hadad-
ezer. — Bedad] (Gn. 36" |) possibly to be connected with a
range of hills called el-Ghoweithe, on the eastern side of the
upper Amon (Dr. Gn., Gu. Gji.). — 47. Samlah] (Gn. 36'« '■ f).
— Masrekah] (Gn. 36=« f ). The name may mean " place of choice
vines," cf. Nahal Sorek "wady of choice vines" (Ju. i6^). — 48.
Sha^id] (Gn. 36" ' ) the same name as that of Saul, King of Israel,
and also of clans of Simeon (4=^) and of Levi (6" (">). — Rehoboth]
(Gn. 36", name of a well Gn. 26", and Assyrian city Gn.
10" f). — The River] is certainly not the Euphrates and the place
Rahaba a little south of the mouth of the Habor (Dr. Gn.),
but the river of Egypt, i.e., the Wady el-Ansh (Gn. 15' ») (Winck.
Gesch. Isr. I. p. 192). — 49. Ba al-hanan] (Gn. 36'^ ' , an official
of David I Ch. 27-8 -j-). The name "Baal is gracious," a synonym
of Hannibal {cf. also Elhanan, Johanan), points to the worship
of Baal in Edom (Dr. Gw.). (Still "Baal" is more a generic title
than that of a specific deity.). — ' Achbor'] (Gn. 36^8 ' , also a cour-
tier of Josiah 2 K. 22'2- '< and perhaps Je. 26" 36'' f, BDB.).
The name means "mouse." — 50. Hadad] (Hadar Gn. 36", but
some forty mss. and Samaritan Mss. read Hadad). Cf. v. ■««. —
Pai] (Pa u Gn. 36" f). Perhaps we should follow (^ of Gn.
and read Pe or ("ilJJS), a mountain and city north-east of the
Dead Sea not definitely located (cf. Nu. 23=8 Dt. 3"). The
mention of his wife and her maternal ancestry is striking; pos-
sibly through this connection he laid claim to the kingship.
The names occur only here and in Gn. 36'', except Mehetabel,
"God confers benefits," which is the name of an ancestor of the
false prophet Shemaiah (Ne. 6'°). — Me-zahab] means "waters of
gold."- — 51*. And Hadad died] not in Gn., probably a copyist's
or the Chronicler's blunder, thinking that the list of kings con-
tinued.
51''-54. Tribal chiefs of Edom. — Taken from Gn. 36^1-" with
briefer introductory formula and omission of the concluding sum-
mary. Why the Chronicler should have given these as chiliarchs,
tribal chiefs, when he omitted in the previous lists this title given
in Gn. 36'5-''- "-30^ is not clear unless he felt that they were the
followers of the kings. This list has been differentiated from the
I. 43-54.] RULERS OF EDOM 79
previous ones because the chiefs were heads of territorial
subdivisions and not purely tribal and possibly ruled after the
conquest by Israel (Dr.). — 51''. lite chief of Timna] and
similarly in the names following. — Timna ]. Cf. v. =«. — Aljah]
('Alwah Gn. 36*° f) perhaps identical with Alwan v. 40. — ■
Jdheth] (Gn. 36" t)-~52. Oholibamah] (in Gn. 362- ^- '4- 's. n the
wife of Esau, ^6^^ as here f). — Elah] probably the seaport usually
called Elath. — Pinon] (Gn. 36^') probably Pimon of Nu. t,^'^ '■,
between Petra and Zo'ar {Onom. 299, 123). — 53. Kenaz\ Cf.
V ". — Teman]. Cf. v. ^\ — Mibsar] and Magdi'el] (Gn. 36^= f)
both in the Onom. (277, 137) located in the district of Gebal (south
of the Dead Sea), and the former, under the name of Mabsara, as a
considerable village belonging to Petra. — Iram] (Gn. 36^'). A
king of Edom 'Arammu is said to b., mentioned in Assy. ins.
(Ball, Gn. p. 94).
43. Snic" . . . d^dSdh] (B^ ol (3a(rtXe?s avrQv = an^oScn adopted
by Bn., Ki. SBOT. The latter inserts a^^-'on with the succeeding
relative clause as a footnote. Ki. Kom. follows i|, which is better, since
(B^^ make the originality of the Vatican text doubtful. — Before ySa Gn.
36'2 has aiN3 I'^ci. — y^2] (i BdXa/c, ® o-;^2 were influenced by the simi-
larity to the names in Nu. 22 {cf. Sayce, art. Edom in DB.). — 46. T(3]
(& here and in Gn. 36'^ BapaS = nna. — rwj'] Qr., some MSS., B and Gn.
36^5 niTi?. (6 Tedda.{L)ix here and in Gn. = a name like D(^)n>% hence Ki.
has a lacuna in the text. — 47. Vv. "t-^ga jn (gB follow v. ^la. — 50. Sj:3
pn] many MSB., CS, Gn. 3639 _|_ ^^^zy; p. — -nn] Gn. ii.-i, but there some
MSS. of ^ and of the Samaritan Pentateuch inn which, .as the dynastic
name of Edom, Ball, SBOT. adopts. Ki. influenced by vtos BapaS of
(6^ corrects to Tin. — i;^d] many mss., B, Gn. IJD. ® in both places
<i>o7wp = nya and so Bn. More likely ij'd - i>'0. — V. ^°'^ is wanting in
(&^, and so considered a later addition from Gn. by Bn., but the con-
fusion of the Vatican text at this point discredits its value. — 51. pdm
Tin] wanting in Gn. — The text of Gn. 36<o^ ^z'y ifliS' nicif nSsi
DPDiJ'a DPDiId'? onnflcnS allows the phylarchs to have been contempora-
neous with the kings previously recorded, while its substitute ^si'?n vn^i
ons suggests that they followed the kings (Be.). This is given directly
in Tl, Adad autem mortuo duces pro regibus in Edom esse coeperunt ; so also
in QI. Probably, however, the Chronicler's change was simply that of
condensation without introducing an exact order of succession. — rv'Syj
Qr., many MSS., B, S, Gn. 36^" niSp. (g TuXa = nSi;' probably from
8o I CHRONICLES
II-IX. The descendants of Jacob. — The pedigrees of the sons
of Jacob are arranged according to the geographical position of
the territory occupied by the several tribes. With Judah (2'-4")
as the proper starting-point, the Chronicler passes through Simeon
(4" -"3) on the south, sweeps around the Dead Sea through the east-
Jordanic tribes, Reuben (5''°), Gad (5"-")> and the eastern half-
tribe of Manasseh (5" ' ) from the south to the north, and, after
inserting Levi (5"-6" (6' -«')), with his cities in both eastern and
western Palestine (Jos. 21), at this convenient point, crosses into
the northern part of western Palestine to Issachar (7'-*), Zebulun
(7«-" corrected text, see on c. 7), Dan (7'^ corrected text), Naphtali
(7"), Manasseh (7''"), Ephraim {■/-"■-'), and Asher (7="-'°), com-
pleting the circle with Benjamin (cc. 8, 9"") and the list of the
inhabitants of Jerusalem (9'") unless this list came from another
and later hand. Asher should appear earlier in the list, but see
comment on i Ch. yso-si, (Jn 27'^ °- Asher is wanting.) More
space is given to the descendants of Judah than to those of any
other tribe, one hundred verses in all, while the tables of the
house of Levi occupy eighty-one, Benjamin fifty, and a scant
eighty-six suffice for the other ten tribes combined. Before
inquiring further into the question of authorship — or, more
properly, editorship — it may be observed that this is exactly what
should be expected from the Chronicler. Chronicles-Ezra-
Nehemiah is primarily a Levitical history of the Judean people.
In the body of the work events of the N. kingdom are ignored,
except as they touch Judean affairs. Hence it is not strange
that the Chronicler should have collected the most genealogical
notices for Judah and Levi. Benjamin also would receive special
attention, since according to the post-exilic conception that tribe
remained loyal to the house of David and was part of the S.
kingdom (v. EBi. art. Benjamin, § 7).
The analysis of these chapters depends upon the idea of the Chron-
icler's character and purpose. With the premise that he intended these
chapters only to serve as an introduction to his history of the Davidic
kings, the task of striking out those parts of the genealogies carried down
beyond the time of David becomes merely mechanical. But this premise
cannot be sustained only on the ground that these tables precede the
n. 1-2.] THE SONS OF ISRAEL 8l
Davidic history. Nor can an analysis be based on the presupposition
that the Chronicler would be careful to avoid conflicting* details either
in his own composition or in the matter he incorporated, since all that
Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. reveals about his character as a writer stamps him as
anything but consistent. The first chapters do not appear to be only
an historical introduction cast in a genealogical mould, but also a
genealogical and geographical preface to the succeeding chapters. As
such they served a useful purpose, especially for a period of Hebrew
history without a chronological era. As a reader consulting a modern
history of Israel for information concerning one of the kings can turn
to the chronological appendix first to learn the dates of his reign which
suggest the general setting, so the reader of Chronicles could learn the
chronological position by consulting the table of the kings (3'" s), or,
if it were a high priest, the table of the high priests (6^ ^- (5" ^ ) ).
Furthermore the Chronicler may have introduced some genealogies
without any particular reason aside from his own interest in them. C. i
clearly shows that he used practically all the genealogies he had for the
early history, hence it is reasonable to suppose that the following chapters
contain pretty much eve'-ything he was able to find. He seems to have
considered it more important that a genealogy should be preserved than
that it should be consistent with others already incorporated. An
account of the geography of many of the tribes was also of interest to
the reader of the Chronicler's history. This was probably suggested by
the account of the distribution of territory in Jos. 12-24, which precedes
the history of the Hebrews in Palestine recorded in Ju.-S.-K. These
geographical notices are omitted strangely enough from the records of
those tribes which occupied what was known as Galilee in the later
times, viz., Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, and Asher. A possible explanation
may be found in the fact that this territory is not involved in the
Chronicler's history. Instead of giving the dwelling-places of Judah
and Benjamin he inserts the inhabitants of Jerusalem (9' ^■), their com-
mon great city.
II. 1-2. The sons of Israel. — These are introduced as a basis
for the subsequent enumeration of the famiUes of Israel. They
are given as follows, Reiihen, Simeon, Levi, Jitdah, Issachar, and
Zebulun, the six sons of Leah, Dan, son of Bilhah Rachel's maid,
Joseph and Benjamin, sons of Rachel, Naphtali, also a son of
Bilhah, and Gad and Asher, sons of Zilpah Leah's maid. The
position of Dan before the sons of Rachel, instead of after, is strik-
ing. Otherwise the order is the same as in Gn. 35"*'-^^ and Ex. i'-«
(omitting Joseph), late priestly narratives (P), where Dan follows
Benjamin. The tribes, however, are not enumerated uniformly in
82 I CHRONICLES
the Old Testament, cj. Gn. 46*" 49= " Nu. i"-" ".42 1^4.15 26'-"
Dt. 2)2>^-^^ et al. (For a full exhibition of the orders of arrangement,
of which there are some seventeen diflferent ones in the Bible, and
for a discussion of the subject, see EBi. art. Tribes by G. B.
Gray, also art. in Exp. Mar. 1902.)
II. 3-IV. 23. The genealogies of Judah.— This passage con-
tains: (i) the descendants of Judah to Hezron's sons Jerahmeel,
Ram, and Caleb (2^-5); (2) the descendants of Ram down to
David and his nephews (2'°-"); (3) descendants of Caleb, including
the family of a son born to Hezron in his old age (2's-2<); (4) the
descendants of Jerahmeel (2"-"); (5) a supplementary table of
Jerahmeelites (2^'-''); (6) supplementary tables of Calebites
(2^2.55). (y) supplementary tables of the descendants of Ram (c. 3);
(8) a second genealogy of Judah (4'").
At first sight we seem to have here a confused mass of genealogical
matter accumulated through various insertions (the view of Bn., Ki.).
Both 2" "■ and 2*- s- contain tables of Calebites, but if either were a
later addition we should expect the interpolator to have placed his
supplement in direct connection with the other, but now they are
separated by vv. 25-41. Similarly we should expect c. 3, if secondary,
to be placed after 2i«-". On the other hand, as the work of the Chron-
icler, the order is natural. First he gives his primary genealogical
material in the order Ram, Caleb, and Jerahmeel, and then appends
supplementary matter (v. i.) concerning each in reverse order. This
reversal of order is the Chronicler's habit (r/. i< ^- ^s ff. et al.). (2^ gives
the sons of Hezron as Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai ('3iSd). Since
Ram is considered first (2'" ^■), we should expect his name to appear
after that of Chelubai, according to the Chronicler's habit of consider-
ing the last first (v. s.). The name Ram may have fallen from the
text of V. 9 by haplography, since the first word of v. '" is also Ram,
being reinserted later in its present place. In that case final ' of
oiSs represents the initial 1 of ai hni. One is tempted to find support
for this suggestion in (S^^ where kuI ^Apafi actually follows 6 XaX^;3,
but since 6 "Pt/jL also precedes it, the former could be due simply to dit-
tography. However, it is not necessary to suppose that the Chronicler
would be consistent with his usual scheme.)
The first table of Caleb's descendants (2'^ 9 ) is regarded as secondary,
by Benzinger, who finds the original list of Calebites in vv. 4:-50a_ This
is possible, especially if only one table of Calebites is ascribed to the
Chronicler, but against it may be urged that as Jerahmeel of the sons
of Hezron comes first in v. », the Chronicler would be likely to place the
n. 1-2.] THE SONS OF ISRAEL 83
list of his descendants last. Since the position of Ram's descendants
seems to be firmly fixed {2^" ^■), the proper place for the table of the
Calebites is between these two, that is, just where it is found. Benzinger
has also unnecessarily considered the passage concerning the family of
Segub (22'-23) to be out of place, but this passage forms a necessary intro-
duction to V. 2* (corrected text v. i.). Although the latter is a doublet
to V. '"', since Ashur is probably the same name as Hur, and Ephrathah
is to be identified with Ephrath, the Chronicler who difi'erentiated Hur
and Ashur elsewhere (4^^ ) may have done so here also. Then 2^'-^'
was introduced by the Chronicler in this place because the birth of
Segub, Hezron's death, Caleb's marriage to his father's wife, and the
birth of Ashur are successive events in Caleb's life. This is further
attested by the chronological order shown in v. '^, and Azubah died, and
Caleb took, etc. On this principle vv. '^-^ constitute a perfect unity.
234-41 is doubtless an appendix to the descendants of Jerahmeel, since
V. "i", these were the sons of Jerahmeel, is certainly a closing formula.
Hence we have an appendix for each of the three sons of Hezron,
Jerahmeel (23^-"), Caleb (2^^-55^^ and Ram (c. 3). The first of these was
probably put in the form of an appendix either because the compiler
recognised the variant tradition regarding the genealogy of Sheshan
(cp. V. 3< and v. ^i) or because he differentiated the two Sheshans, hence
vv. ^^ ff- had no direct connection with Jerahmeel. The second appendix
with its geographical names and the third with its list of kings constitute
proper material for postscripts. The reverse order of these additions
is so suggestive of the Chronicler that it is safe to ascribe them to his
original compilation in the absence of any strong evidence to the contrary.
The first verse of 4' -"^ is regarded by Benzinger as a superscription in
which five descendants of Judah, Perez, Hezron, Caleb (so read for
Carmi, v. i.), Hur, and Shobal, are co-ordinated as sons, while according
to 2^ ^- they are members of a descending line. He further supposes
that the Chronicler then took these up in reverse order. He strikes.out
as secondary the verses which interrupt this scheme, viz. vv. *"'■ '^- ^'-^^
It is doubtful, however, if v. ' ever was intended as a superscription to
vv. 2-23. This verse is directly connected with v. 2, with which it shows
the Judean descent of the Zorathites, cf. 2". The Chronicler apparently
used the device of putting the first five descendants in juxtaposition as a
convenient abridgment {cf. i' ^- 2* ff), since their relationship was well
known or could be learned from c. 2. Where he passes beyond well-
known names (v. 2) the relationship is indicated. The following
genealogies seem to be nothing more than short tables of Judean families
which the compiler considered worth preserving. There is no good
reason why they could not have come from the Chronicler, nor is there
much ground upon which to argue for their authenticity. On the age
of the material, see c. 4.
84 I CHRONICLES
The source from which the Chronicler derived those genealogies not
found in the OT. is uncertain. There is little likelihood that he had a
book of Judean genealogies. More probably he used all the material
which came to hand, connecting the names when possible with one of the
older branches of the family. Identity of names was sufficient for this
purpose (see below on 2-").
II. 3-8. Sons of Judah. — These verses, except v. «, contain
gleanings from the historical books. The writer seems hard put
to find descendants for certain branches of Judah. — 3. The sons
of Judah Er, Onan, etc.], derived from Gn. 38, cf. Gn. 46'i '■. —
Aitd Er the first horn of Judah, etc.]. This remark is taken ver-
batim from Gn. 38', hence Bn. without reason infers the passage
secondary to Ch. The omission to record the similar fate of
Onan, Gn. 38'°, is noticeable. Here, however, as elsewhere the
Chronicler assumes that his readers are familiar with the narratives
of the Hexateuch. The story of the untimely death of Er and
Onan implies that two of the ancient clans of Judah early disap-
peared.— The Canaanite mothers Shu a and Tamar indicate a
union of Israelite Judean stock with Canaanites. Reminiscences
of early tribal history were thus preserved in folk-tales. For
descendants of Shelah cf. 4-' 9* Ne. ii^ — 4. And Tamar his
datighter-in-law bore to him Perez and Zerah] derived from Gn.
2813-30 Perez and Zerah were the youngest clans of Judah.
Zerah, perhaps the autochthonous, was according to Stade of pure
Canaanitish stock originally and at first surpassed Perez, but later
declined (G£'5r/j. I. p. 158). — 5. The sons of Perez: Hezron and
Hafmd], also a direct quotation from Gn. 46'^ cf. Nu. 2621. On
Hezron see vv. ^ ^ . Beyond the family of the Hamulites, Nu. 26=',
no descendants of Hamul are given elsewhere in the Old Testa-
ment. (On the name see textual notes.) — 6. The sons of Zerah:
Zimri and Ethan and Heman and Calcol and Darda *]. Zimri 's
Zabdi of Jos. y- '» (for change of spelling see text. note). Ethan
the Ezrahite, Heman, Calcol, and Darda sons of Mahol, are men-
tioned in I K. 5" (431) as distinguished wise men whom Solomon
surpassed. Hence since Ezrahite CHITS) might be explained as
a descendant of Zerah (BDB.) and may be regarded as an attrib-
utive of Heman, Calcol, and Darda, the Chronicler evidently
n. 3-8.] SONS OF JUDAH 85
placed these wise men as descendants of Zerah (Meyer, Entst. Jud.
p. 161). This identification has generally been accepted (Be.,
Ke., Mov., but not by Zee.). Ethan and Heman occur also in
I Ch. as the names of two Levitical singers of the time of David,
Ethan=Juduthun, 6=« "'> 15"- ", and an Ethan is also given among
the ancestors of Asaph, i Ch. 6" '■^'^\ and Heman i Ch. 6'8 <">
16" ■IS 25'- ■'-^ From the point of view of the Chronicler, since
this Ethan and this Heman are Levites they cannot have been
identical with those of our passage. Pss. 88 and 89, however,
according to their titles are maschils of Heman the Ezrahite and
Ethan the Ezrahite. Since Ps. 88 is also Korahite it is probable
that Ezrahite Ethan and Heman in the titles of these Psalms repre-
sent both the Levitical singers and the wise men of i K. 5" (43')-
In short, the one Ethan and the one Heman of Israel's early tradi-
tions, svTionyms of wisdom, seem each in the genealogical system
or notes of the Chronicler to have been evolved into two persons.
Ewald {Hist. III. p. 278) thought that the two great singers of the
tribe of Judah were taken by the Levitical music schools into their
company and family and were afterward in the titles of Pss. 88, 89,
reckoned to the tribe of Levi. When these wise men lived,
whether they were cotemporaries of Solomon or traditional wise
men of a more ancient past, we have no means of knowing. Ac-
cording to Seder Olam Rabha (ed. Meyer, p. 52), they prophesied
in Egypt. (For a fanciful interpretation of their names connecting
them with Job and his three friends see Klo. on i K. 5".) — 7. And
the sons of Carmi]. The plural ("•Jl) sons of is sometimes used
in genealogical lists when only one son or descendant follows, cf.
vv. 8. 30. 31, 42 Qn. 26" 46" Nu. 26*. — ' Achar the tronhler of Israel,
etc.] 'Achan Jos. 7' '« "> " =^ 22" (see text. note). The brevity
of this notice of Achar and the omission of Zabdi the connecting
link between Achar and Carmi is another assumption of familiarity
with the narratives of the Hexateuch. — 8. ' Azariah]. Nothing
further is known of this Azariah. Whether the Chronicler meant
an immediate or remote descendant of Ethan cannot be deter-
mined. The name is very common. No other Zerahites are given
elsewhere in the Old Testament except Sibbecai the Hushathite,
and Maharai the Netophathite, two of David's captains, 27"- ".
86 I CHRONICLES
3. P.1B'] (8 Sai^aj = yrc'. — 5. Sicni] the root Son with the meaning
spared BDB. is favoured by the name n^'^cn^ on a seal (EBi., art.
Hamul). C$ EfiovijX (" Ie/xou7jX by dittography of the preceding I) =
Spm = Ssicm fromicn + *?« brother-in-law of God. This seems a more
likely derivation, cf. 4^, but the meaning is dub., seeKi. SBOT., Kom.,
SS., We. DGJ., p. 22. — 6 . ncr] Jos. 7' nji, (6 Zo/x)3p(e)i in both passages.
The confusion of a and D is phonetic, of t and 1 graphic. — J?"ni] many
MSS., <$^ + MSS., &, 51, I K. 5" j.n-ni, adopted by Ki. — 7. According to
Jos. 7' Carmi was the son of Zabdi = Zimri {v. s.), hence ^ma ^ici M31
may have fallen from the te.xt or the Chronicler assumed this relationship
was known. — ij;] Jos. 7' ]y;. In the former we have an assimilation
of the name of the man to that of the valley of Achor (Dill.) or the latter
arose from a scribal error, cf. (5^ in Jos. Axap.
9-55. The Hezronites. — Whatever may have been the relative
p)osition of this clan of Judah in the early history of the tribe, to the
Chronicler Hezron was the all-important clan. Of it he reckoned
by descent not only the royal family of David but also the great
claris of Jerahmeel and Caleb. The accounts given of them are
evidently from various sources. V. ' (excepting the word Ram,
see below) is derived from some old source other than the Old
Testament. Vv. '"'^ appear to be taken directly from Ruth.
Vv. "■" in contents are drawn from i and 2 S. Vv. ^^■•*, regarded
by Ki. as an insertion (but see above), are derived partially from
the Hexateuch, although considerable matter is new. Vv. ^^-ss ^j-e
entirely independent of anything elsewhere in the Old Testament.
Of these, w.^^-'\ according to Ki., who follows We., represent
early material, v\'. "-" late, vx. *'^-*^ early, v. " late, v. *'' early, v. <«
late, w. ^' '■ early, w. "" late.
9. The sons of Hezron. — Hezron] w. '• " "■ «< -^ 4', appears
also as a son of Reuben On. 46' Ex. 6'* Nu. 26^' i Ch. 5', and
as the name of a place indicating the southern boundary of Judah
Jos. 153 (cf. also Kerioth-hezron Jos. 15"). j1"li'n is to be con-
nected with ni"n enclosure (HWB.'\ BDB.). A Hezronite then
is a villager or dweller in a permanent settlement, a kraal, in con-
trast to movable encampments, "n^'n appears in the names of
several localities of southern Judah and Simeon besides the two
mentioned; Hazar-addar Nu. 34% Hazar-gaddah Jos. 15", Hazar-
susah in Simeon Jos. ig^ cf. i Ch. 4'', Hazar-shual in southern
n. 9-17.] THE GENEALOGY OF DAVID 87
Judah Jos. 15" = I Ch. 4'^ Ne. 11", in Simeon Jos. 19'. Names
from this root are also common elsewhere {v. BDB.). Under
Hezron then we may have indicated only semi-nomads inhabiting
a fixed abode and the name may have come from no political clan
but only from a social class from which the Hezronites of Nu.
266- 21 were evolved, and which occasioned this son of Perez and
likewise the son of Reuben. — Jerahmeel], vv. ^* «• "■ *\ represents a
clan dwelling in the days of David in southern Judah, i S. 27'">
30". — Ram] as a second son of Hezron is suspicious because (i)
the Old Testament elsewhere knows of no Judean clan Ram co-
ordinate with Caleb and Jerahmeel, (2) the descendants of
Ram, which follow w. '"-'^ are given not in families and cities
as in the case of those of Jerahmeel and Caleb, vv. "-33 .12-44.
<«-•% but simply in the pedigree of David. Ram is plainly intro-
duced as a son of Hezron by the Chronicler from Ru. 4^^. The
original statement from another source was evidently, and the
sons of Hezron Jerahmeel and Chelubai, and this was the intro-
duction to vv. "-33. 42-44. 46. 48^ whcrc the descendants of Jerah-
meel and Caleb are given. — Chelubai], equivalent to Caleb vv.
18-24 q. V.
10-12. The ancestry of David. — Ram begat Aminadab, etc.].
Omitting the words prince of Judah, derived from Nu. i', this
pedigree of Jesse is taken verbatim from Ru. 4i8b-22a_ jt jg ap-
parently artificial, for i and 2 S. know only of Jesse the father of
David the Bethlehemite. Salma or Salmon was the reputed
founder of Bethlehem, cf. vv. "• 6^. Nashon the son of Aminadab,
according to P, was the prince of Judah during the Exodus, Nu. i'
2' et al. Out of these materials the author of Ruth, or some other
genealogist, with the added names of Boaz and Obed, possibly
ancestors of Jesse, constructed this genealogy, placing Ram as the
son of Hezron at its head. Two facts probably led to the selection
of Ram: (i) in genealogical lore, the ancient Ram was the son of
Jerahmeel i Ch. 2'^, but David plainly was not a Jerahmeelite,
hence the father's name could not be used in his pedigree, and we
have not Hezron, Jerahmeel, Ram, but simply Hezron, Ram; and
(2) the appropriate meaning of the word "lofty," cf. We. DGJ. pp.
17/., Bertholet, Com. on Ru., p. 69.
88 I CHRONICLES
13-17. The family of Jesse. — 13. And Jesse begat his first
born Eli\ib, etc.\ According to i S. 16'° ' 17'^ Jesse had eight
sons, Eliab, Abinadab, and Shammah, and four others whose
names are not mentioned, and David the youngest. ^ gives eight
here, adding Elihu from 27 's, which i^ there has probably by cor-
ruption (rS'i^S becoming T\*h^, (^ EXta^). Was the number
eight or seven? According to Budde (SBOT.) the sections con-
taining I S. 16"' '• 17'^ are among the latest additions to the book
from a Midrash after 400 b. c. Another Midrash, equally current
then, may have been followed by the Chronicler or invented by
him, giving the number seven and also the names of the three
sons, N'ethan^el, Raddai, and Ozem, which are not given elsewhere.
The genuineness of the name Nethan^el is doubtful, since (accord-
ing to Gray, HPN. p. 233) it is of post-Davidic formation.
Raddai and Ozem (see v. ") could well be genuine as far as their
forms go. — 16.- And their sisters Zeriiiah and Abigail}. These are
recorded for the sake of their distinguished sons. According to
2 S. 17" i| Abigail was the daughter of Nahash and hence she
has been regarded as a step- or half-sister of David (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., et al.). Probably, however, the 1| of 2 S. 17=' is corrupt
and Jesse should be substituted for Nahash ((|, B, We. TS., Klo.,
Bu. SBOT.). — And the sons of Zeriiiah Abishai,* Jo'ab and
Asah'el]. These heroes are repeatedly named as sons of their
mother I S. 26528.218, etc. The name of their father is nowhere men-
tioned. Of the three brothers, Asahel according to the narrative
of 2 S. 2' 8-32 was clearly the youngest, but which of the other two
was the older is uncertain. The order here suggests Abishai; that
of 2 S. 2'% Joab. — 17. And Abigail bore 'Amasa and the father,
etc.] derived from 2 S. 17". — The Ishmaelite] the true reading
{v. L).
9. "'3i'-r](gA Xa\e)3 = 3^3, b Xa/SeX.— 10. >:2] (^ rod otKOV = n>3.—
11. ndSb' bis] (B and Ru. 4=' jic':';' but Ru. 420 r\r.'^:.', cf. We. DGJ. p. 37.
— 13. •'^\v] manyMSS. (Kennic.) "'C which may be simply a correction
from the preceding •>•»:•% v. ^■. Since the author would be likely to use the
same spelling, 'r>N has been taken for an original ';"% SS., Ki. SBOT.
— anj'jNi]. (S AfjL. is a phonetic error common in (&. — 16. '>B'3n] ii'i' 18'*
ipu. 15 2 S. io'°, but elsewhere in i and 2 S. ■'tt'iax, and so Ki. in Ch.;
n. 18-24.] DESCENDANTS OF CALEB 89
($ 'A^eicrd., 'A/Sicro-d. — 17. ■'SNyctS'"'n] 2 S. ly^s ^SNTJ'''n. The latter is an
error of transcription or a Massoretic revision, Dr. TS., Bu. SBOT.,
and authorities generally.
18-24. The family of Caleb. — Caleb appears in the history
of David as a clan inhabiting southern Judah and apparently dis-
tinct from Judah (i S. 25' 30"). According to the narrative of the
He.xateuch, Caleb the cotemporary of Joshua, the reputed founder
of the clan, was a Kenizzite (Nu. 32'2 Jos. 14= '^), and since Kenaz
appears among the grandsons and dukes of Edom (Gn. 36"- '^ *'
I Ch. i'«- "), the clan Caleb was originally of Edomiiic origin,
kindred with the Amalekites. They claimed the conquest of
Hebron and Debir (Jos. 1515-17 Ju. i ■'-!'). Carmel was also
one of their tovms. Through the influence of David during his
reign at Hebron they were probably incorporated into the tribe of
Judah. They are not mentioned subsequently in OT. history
until Caleb appears in our genealogical lists, vv. '^-^'i- "-49 4u-i5a_
His prominence here shows at once that Calebites must have been
conspicuous in post-exilic Judah, forming possibly the bulk of
the tribe, since the Chronicler knows so few other families. In
these lists are assigned to Caleb or his descendants towns of
southern Judah, — Ziph, Mareshah, Hebron, Korah, etc., vv. ""%
clearly the pre-exilic dwelling-places of the clan, and also towns
further north, Kirjath-jcarim, Bethlehem, Eshtaol, Zorah, etc.,
vv. '"-5^ These latter towns, without doubt, were the post-exilic
homes of the Calebites. During the exile they were dispossessed
from their southern Judean homes apparently by the Edomites,
who after the fall of Jerusalem took possession of southern Judah,
compelling the earlier inhabitants to move northward. The
Edomites themselves were driven northward by the Nabateans
(see Mai. i^), cf. Ez. 35'" '^ 36^ (We. DGJ. pp. 28 /., Meyer,
Entst. Jud. p. 115, Torrey, JBL. XVH. i. 1898 pp. 16/.). Singu-
larly enough in view of the prominence given to Caleb in i Ch.,
there is no direct mention of Calebites in Ezra and Nehemiah; only
an indirect reference in Ne. 3 ', where among the repairers of the
wall is Rephaiah the son of Hur, ruler of half the district of Jeru-
salem. Now Hur represents clearly, from the appearance of the
name among Caleb's descendants in w. " " 4' \ a Calebite family.
90 I CHRONICLES
In the notices of the Calebites and Jerahmeelites (vv. " " ) in this
chapter have been seen reminiscences of an original migration of a
portion of Israel from the south into Canaan (S. A. Cook, Notes on OT.
p. 40, et al.). Such an immigration of Calebites, at least, most likely
took place (Moore, Ju. p. 31), but a simpler explanation of these
notices is that the descendants of these clans desired an honourable
place among the post-exilic Jews and the Chronicler, favouring this
desire, gave them a prominent place in his work. The theory that
the Jerahmeelites played any such conspicuous part in the history of
Israel as is alleged by the editor of EBi. is utterly without foundation.
18. And Caleb begat sons from Azubah his wife daughter of
Jerioth*]. Under Azubah (nilTJ?, forsaken) is probably a refer-
ence to the abandoned home of the Calebites in southern Judah
(v. s.), and the daughter of Jerioth HiyT, tents) probably
looks back to the early nomadic life of the Calebites (We. DGJ,
p. 26). — And these were her sons Jesher f, Sliobab, and Ardon f].
These sons of Azubah represent pre-exilic Calebite families which
dwelt in southern Judah. Shobab is also the name of a son of
David 35 i4< 2 S. 5". — 19. When 'Azubah died then Caleb took to
himself Ephrath]. Since Ephrath is equivalent to Ephratha v. 5°
4*, a name of Bethlehem Mi. 52 Ru. 4", and possibly the name of a
district in northern Judah (cf. Ps. 132^, Del.), this new marriage
clearly expresses the movement of the Calebites northward and
their settlement in northern Judah (v. s., cf. v. s"). — Hur] the
leading family or stock of post-exilic Calebites (cf. Ne. 3', v. s.).
Identifying him with Ashhur v. -* 4% he appears as the father, i.e.,
founder or coloniser, of Tekoa and his sons of Bethlehem, Beth-
gader, Kirjath-jearim vv. "". (Such a shortening as of Ashhur
into Hur is not uncommon, cf. Ahaz = Jehoahaz COT. I. p. 255.).—
20. And Hur begat Uri, etc.]. This genealogy of Bezalel, the
reputed skilled workman of the Tabernacle, is taken verbatim
from P, Ex. 31^ 355'', cf. 2 Ch. i^. It illustrates how material has
been brought together in these lists. The identity of a name
seemed a sufficient cause to give a genealogical connection. Proba-
bly, however, the prominence of the family of Hur and its possession
of artisans led to the origination of this descent of Bezalel. Vv.
"■" are singular in this connection, interrupting the story of Caleb's
matrimonial alliances (but v.s.). — 21. And afterwards]. The refer-
n. 18-24.] DESCENDANTS OF CALEB 9I
ence is plainly to v. '. — Machir father ofGilead] a son of Manasseh
mentioned as the father or conqueror of Gilead in Nu. 26" 32"
Jos. i7> Dt. 3'°. In Ju. 5 Machir stands for the tribe of Manasseh.
He was clearly the most important clan of the tribe. — Segub] not
mentioned elsewhere, possibly an error of transcription for Argob,
the district inhabited by Jair (Dt. 3'^ Jos. 13''), who in v. ^^ appears
as his son. — 22. Jair] given as a son of Manasseh (Nu. 32^' Dt.
3i< Jos. 13"), also one of the minor Judges (Ju. lo'). — Aiid he had
twenty three cities in the land of Gilead]. With Jair are repeatedly
connected the tent villages Havvoth Jair v. " Dt. 3'^ Nu. 32<'
Jos. 13"=; thirty cities Ju. 10" ; sixty cities, wrongly placed in
Bashan, Jos. 13'° i K. 4'^ The number given for these tovras
evidently fluctuated. They represent the northern portion of
Gilead. — 23. Geshiir and Aram] Geshur, an Aramean tribe
dwelling in the region of Argob and at the time of David an inde-
pendent kingdom 3^ 2 S. 3' 13" '• 15'; Aram, a generic geo-
graphical term for the country including northern Mesopotamia,
Syria, and as far south as the borders of Palestine {cf. i"). Here
the Arameans adjoining Geshur are evidently meant. — Kenath and
her daughters sixty cities] a district perhaps the modern Kanawat
east of Argob in Bashan (cf. Nu. 32^^). When these were lost to
Israel is unknown, probably before the reign of Omri, since from
then on the border fortress between Israel and Syria was Ramah
(St. Gesch. I. p. 150). — All these were the sons of Machir] the
summary of a section originally larger probably than w. ''-".
The introduction in the midst of a list of Hezronites from the three
sons, Jerahmeel, Ram, and Caleb, of those through another son
by a later marriage renders the contents of w. 2>-" surprising, and
especially are they strange in connecting in any way the Hezron
of Judah with members of the tribe of Manasseh. Whether the
historical fact of the incorporation of Judaites with Manassites
lies back of this or whether the whole notice arises from a misunder-
standing of genealogical material is uncertain. In the latter case
Hezron may represent a Reubenite clan of that name {cf. 5') which
coalesced with Gileadites (Meyer, Entst. Jnd. p. 160, Steuemagel,
Einw. Isr. Stdmme, p. 19). In the former case it is possible that
in post-exilic times a colony of Jews had settled east of Jordan in
92 I CHRONICLES
Gilead, and that through this fact arose this genealogical connection
between Hezron of Judah and Machir (Bn.). In Jos. ig'* men-
tion is made of Judah [on] the Jordan, which has been thought to
point to such a colony (yet the phrase may be a corruption).
Judas Maccabeus undertook a campaign in that district in order
to rescue Jews from the hand of the heathen. Ki., on the other
hand, holds w. "•• to contain ancient material referring to a union
of families of Manasseh, refugees from northern Israel, with those
of Judah about 600 b. c. ; cf. the emphasis placed upon the cities
of Jair in Dt. — 24. And ajier Hezron died Caleb went in unto
Ephrath the wife of his father *] another genealogical notice of
the setdement of the district of Bethlehem by the Calebites, cf. vv.
"• 5". The taking of a father's wife was asserting claim to the
father's possessions {cf. 2 S. 16" i K. 2^^--^), and well expressed the
legitimacy of Caleb's residence in northern Judah. — And she bore
Ashhiir] clearly a repetition of v. ' = =. Ashhiir and Hur must be
identical. — The father of Teko'a]. Hur was probably the exilic
or post-exilic founder of Tekoa, or the family settled there.
Tekoa, mod. Teku'a, is about five miles south of Bethlehem. The
place is frequently mentioned (4' 2 Ch. ii« 20" 2 S. 14'' Am. i' Je.
6't).
18. r\y;>-\'< rxi hd's navjj ns T^in |nxn p 3*^31] (6^ reproduces M.
* has for T'Sin eXa/3ev; § for 'nN> p ; ^r^x^, pn. B combines (6*,
M, and ^ accepit iixorem nomine Azubali de qua genuit Jerioth. This
Ki. (SBOT.) follows, nvTi nx niSn nrx r\2vy nx np*?, but in Kom.,
BH. he follows & ns i.tj'x 'y js. We. (DGJ. p. ^t,) reads na
nv'T' instead of '"< nxi. M yields And Caleb son of Hezron begat of
Azubah his wife and of Jerioth (AV., RV., Kau., Be., Oe.). Caleb then
has children of two wives, but the context suggests those of only one wife,
Azubah, i^b. i9»_ j_ h. Mich, met this difficulty by regarding Jerioth as
another name for Azubah, the waw in PNi being explicative. Ke. and
Zoe. follow ^ regarding Jerioth the daughter of Caleb and mother of the
sons of V. "I'. On the whole, we prefer the reading of We., preferred by
Bn. It still leaves the harsh construction of njirj? nx after T'Sin denot-
ing the mother and not the child (nir's is probably a gloss to render this
obvious). A parallel construction, however, may be found in Is. 65',
where i*?' Hiph. has the force to cause to bear, or nx may be taken as
equivalent to nxD, cf. ja iSim 8'. — 24. n^jx |nxn ntrxi n.-nsx 2^22] M
adhered to by Ke., AV., RV. is clearly corrupt. (B has ^\dev XaX^/3
n. 25-41.] DESCENDANTS OF JERAHMEEL 93
els 'EcppdBa Kal i) yvv^ "E<T€pi)v 'A/3td, so 21. The true text, rendered
above, undoubtedly was n>3N inxn p-^-n r\r.-yQH j'^j S3, We. DGJ., pp.
14/., Ki. — iin-f.x]= -iin-rN, We. DGJ. p. 15, SS., cf. 'ry^rx = Sy^-^r^s
8" 9", iina^N 7I8. In vv. 's. so 44 he is called mn, r/. S;3 -':';3;'n S^".
25-33. The families of the Jerahmeelites. — Jcmfimecl in the
time of David was an independent clan like that of Caleb, in-
habiting the Negeb of Judah (i S. 27'° 30"). It is not mentioned
in subsequent history. Whether it played any part in the post-
exilic Jewish community, or whether this genealogy having been
preserved with that of Caleb was therefore recorded by the Chroni-
cler, we do not know (v. s. on vv. '^-■'). All the names given are
comparatively early ones and favour the antiquity and historicity
of the list. — 25. Ram] v.", cf. vv. ' '" Jb. 32^. A possible con-
nection has been seen between this family and Abram. The name
by some is supposed to represent an ancient deity {v. s. i-'). — Bii-
nah and Oren j]. — Ozem] v. '^ f. — His brother *]. So we must
probably read in place of the proper name Ahijah. — 26. ' Atarah\
This name of the mother of the most widely extended family of
the Jerahmeelites is to be compared for its original meaning and
derivation with Hezron, v. ', and probably arose from the Jerah-
meelites inhabiting Ataroth (n'ltDJ?), protected places (We. DGJ.
p. 15). Ataroth alone appears as a local name, Nu. 32=- =4 Jos. 16%
and also in combination Jos. 16* 18'^ Nu. 32^5 i Ch. 2'^ That
Alarah was a second wife probably shows that the earlier sons of
Jerahmeel represented nomad families, while her descendants
those of a more settled life. — Onam] v. "^ also the name of a family
of Edom i^° Gn. 36" f, perhaps connected with Onan the son of
Judah, v.'. — 27. Maaz and Janiin and 'Eker]. Maaz and Eker
are mentioned only here. Janiin is among the sons of Simeon,
Gn. 46"'.— 28. Shammai]. Cf. 2-'- ''■ "• "^ 4'\~Jada'] v. ",
for compounds of root from which it comes (pi"), see i'^. —
Nadab] v. " a frequent name. — Abishur] v. " f. — 29. Ahihail * ]
name of the wife also of Rehoboam 2 Ch. ii'^ and a man's name,
a Levite Nu. y\ a Gadite i Ch. 5", and the father of Esther Est.
2'5 929 \.—Ahban and Molid f]. — 30. Sded f]. — Appaim] v. '' f. —
31. Jisk'i] 2=' 4^"- "2 554 -j-, a name thus of frequent occurrence. —
Sheshan] vv. ^'- "■ " f. — Ahlai] ii<' f. — 32. Jether] a frequent
94 I CHRONICLES
name. — 33. Peleth] Nu. i6' a Reubenite. Possibly there is con-
nection with Beth-pelet a city of southern Judah, Jos. 15" Ne.
II". — Zaza]\. — These were the sons of J erahme el\ the conclusion
of this list of Jerahmeelites. None of these families or persons
are mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament (except Sheshan
below), and hence nothing more can be said concerning them.
The fact that Onam is also the name of a family of Edom and Ja-
min of one of Simeon suggests a close relationship with those
tribes.
25. n>n.y] the name of a 6fth son, Ahijah, AV., RV., Kau., Iff, 51;
the name of the mother of the preceding four sons, a c following nxx
having fallen out, the text having stood 'N-; dxn Ozem of Ahijah,
Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe. (6 dSeX^ds avrov = n^ns has been followed,
so Ki. ^ ^coilu.. = vns, We. DGJ., p. 15. — 29. S\n'2N] read with
many mss., CS", '^'n-ax. — 30. n^cs] also v. ". Ki. emends to D'-«dn
after (&^ 'Ecppdt/j., § Jdj^iia, since a name D'sn is suspicious, We.
DGJ., but ^B niay be a corruption of A(p4>aifjL 0&*. — ='J3 n*^] also v. ",
see Ges. § 152M.— 31. v-'] <S^ 'la-e/iLi^X, g> }-»liw4,), both of which
Ki. (SBOT.) thinks point to a divine appellative at the end, hence
following the indication of C6^ lefftrovei he reads ve's - ^ic'> - Sj-^arx
cf. We. TS., on I S. 14^3.
34-41. The pedigree of Elishama a descendant of the Je-
rahmeelite Sheshan. — 34. And Sheshan had no sons but daugh-
ters]. To reconcile this statement with v. ="> it has been assumed
that A Mai was a daughter of Sheshan, "sons" there indicating
only descendants (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.) This is possible, but for
w. "-23 the Chronicler probably had an entirely different source
from that of vv. ^^-^i. (Ki. regards them as a late section added
to the work of the Chronicler, giving another and fuller story of
the lines of descent from Sheshan and placed here as an appendix
to the families of the Jerahmeelites.) — Jar hi]. Of this Eg}-ptian
nothing further is known, and also nothing further of the four-
teen descendants recorded in xx. "-^■. Although many of the
names occur elsewhere, in no case can they be probably
identified with those persons. We do not know also when
Elishama (v. ■"), w-hose pedigree is so carefully recorded, flour-
ished. Since Sheshan is the tenth in descent from Judah, older
n. 42-55.] DESCENDANTS OF CALEB 95
commentators thought of him as residing in Egypt not far from
the period of the Exodus and placed the period of Ehshama four-
teen generations later or near the close of the period of the Judges
(Ke.)- More likely Elishama represents some one near the time
of the Chronicler. If, however, Jarha lived as early even as 1000
B. c, and Elishama about 600 b. c, there is nothing in the charac-
ter of the names given against the genealogy being genuine. They
stand in sharp contrast with others which appear to be made up
from names current in the Chronicler's own time (Gray, HPN.
P- 235)-
42-55. Families of Caleb. — Cf. w. ^^-\ Vv. "-^5. n. 49. 50a
belong together and come apparently from the same source as vv.
26-33. Vv. " ■'s- i-o^/^-ss appear also of common origin, and belong
to the late material of i Ch. (We., Ki.).— 42. The brother oj
Jerafimeel] v. \ — Mesha*] an early family of Caleb (if text is not
altered) of which nothing further is known; in 2 K. 3^ the name of
a king of Moab. (g has Maresha, see below\ — Ziph] two places of
this name are given among the towns of Judah: one Jos. 15-^, still
unidentified, the other Jos. 15", cf. i S. 2^* ^ 26^, the modern Tell
Ziph one and three-quarters hours south-east of Hebron (Baed."
p. 170). This latter is here referred to. — Maresha'^] the name
of a well-known town of the Shephelah, Jos. 15^^ 2 Ch. 11 ^ 149 '■
20" Mi. I '5 -j-, the modern Merash (Baed.« p. 116). It is difhcult,
however, to bring this place in connection with Hebron, although
Hebron may in some way have been colonised therefrom. Well-
hausen regards the name, from the preceding words "sons of,"
as purely gentilic, and not to be connected with the town. Proba-
bly both Mesha and Maresha are due to dittographies from v. ^'
and the verse originally read Sons of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel,
. . . his first-born the fatlier of Ziph and the father of Hebron.
The name of this first-born may lie hidden in Mesha or Maresha.
— 43. And the sons of Hebron]. The descendants now given are
mostly, if not all, geographical names. — Korah]. The connection
suggests a tov^Ti of southern Judah, although mentioned elsewhere
in the OT. only as a family or descendant of Levi. — Tappuah]
equivalent to Beth-tappuah Jos. 15", the mod. Taffiih west of
Hebron {SWP. HI. pp. 310, 379; Baed.^ p. 1^2).— Rekem]
96 I CHRONICLES
Otherwise unmentioned, probably a town of southern Judah. A
town of this name is given as belonging to Benjamin Jos. i8",
also the name of a king of Midian Nu. 31' Jos. 13='. — Shatna]
perhaps the same as Eshtemoa (Hithp. of same stem) Jos. 155"
21'*, cf. the mod. Semiia identified with Eshtemoa (Rob. Res. II.
p. 194). The location of Eshtemoa in the immediate neighbour-
hood of Hebron favours this identification. — 44. Raham\ The
root (nni) appears in Jerahmeel. — Jorkeam] probably Jokdean
Jos. 155% mentioned before Juttah, mod. Yata, east of Hebron
(Baed.* p. 169). — Shammai] (in v. '^ a Jerahmeelite tribe, in i"
Edomite), not identified as a geographical name, perhaps gentilic;
a name of common occurrence, cf. v. -K — 45. Ma on] Jos. 15"
I S. 25', mod. Main south of Hebron {SWP. III. pp. 404, 415;
Baed.2 p. 144). — Beth-znr] Jos. 15^8 2 Ch. 11' Ne. 3"=, mod.
Beit Sur, four miles north of Hebron {SWP. III. p. 311 ; Baed.* p.
112). — 46. And Ephah the concubine of Caleb, '^ etc.]. This verse
is entirely obscure. Neither 'Ephah, Haran, Moza, nor Gazaz
can be identified with any places, families, or persons mentioned
elsewhere. Ki. joins with v. ^^ and marks as a later addition to i
Ch. — 47. Jahdai]. The connection with the foregoing is not given
and the name has been taken as that of another wife or concubine
of Caleb; more probably Jahdai is a descendant of Caleb whose
name in the original connection has fallen from the text. Of the
following sons none are otherwise known unless Pelet is identical
with Beth-pelet a town of southern Judah Jos. 15". The verse
according to We. and Ki. is to be connected with v. *^. — 48.
Maacah] entirely unknown, since this cannot be connected with
the Aramean Maacah or with various persons mentioned else-
where in the Old Testament of the same name (3=^ 7'^ 8=' 11", etc.).
— Sheber f] and Tirhanah •\] are equally unknown. — 49. And
Shaaph begat^], a continuation of v."'. — Madmannah] from Jos.
15" a well-known town of southern Judah, possibly Unim Deinneh,
twelve miles north-east of Beersheba {SWP. HI. pp. 392, 399). —
5// ez'a f] except Qr. 2 S. 20=^ entirely unknown. — Machbena]
perhaps the same as Cabbon, a city of southern Judah Jos. i^*"
(BDB.). — Gibe a] possibly the same as Gibeah Jos. 15", mod.
Jeba, eight miles west of Bethlehem {SWP. III. p. 25), although a
I
n. 42-55.] DESCENDANTS OF CALEB 97
locality further south would be more natural. The name "hill"
can readily be thought of as belonging elsewhere. — And Achsa
was the daughter of Caleb]. Thinking that the Chronicler dis-
tinguished more than one Caleb and that the son of Hezron differed
from the son of Jephunneh Mov. regarded this clause as an inter-
polation from Jos. 15'^, cf. Ju. i'\ It is wanting in ^. Ke., recog-
nising two Calebs, ben Hezron and ben Jephunneh, held the latter,
the father of Achsa, to have been a descendant of the former, and
bath, daughter, here to signify in a wide sense female descendant.
The original framers of these genealogies probably sought no
explanation of a Caleb ben Hezron and a Caleb ben Jephunneh,
but identified the two and gave Achsah as a daughter in each
case. — 50. These ivere the sons of Caleb]. This summary
looks backward, not forward, cf. v. "b^ a^^ closes the list of pre-
exilic Calebites in their ancient homes in the vicinity of Hebron.
The sons of Hur the first-born of Ephratha ]. These words intro-
duce a new paragraph giving the Calebites of the post-exilic period
(see above vv. '« '•). — Shobal the father of Kirjath-jearim, 51,
Salma the father of Bethlehem, Hareph the father of Beth-gader].
These three, sons of Hur, are either the post-exilic founders of the
three towns mentioned, or an adoption of the reputed founders of
those places by the later Calebite settlers. According to Ru. 4" '■
Salma was the great-great-grandfather of David. — Beth-gader]
0!f.3 Jos. i2'3), Gedor, see 4^ — 52. And the sons of Shobal . . .
were Re'ajah^, half of the Manahtitcs'^]. This passage is utterly
obscure. The emendations are derived from v. " 42. — 53. The
Ithrites and the Piithites and the Shiimathites and the Mishra'ites].
Nothing further is known of these families of Kirjath-jearim. Two
of David's heroes were Ithrites 2 S. 2338 1 Ch. 11"; their connection,
however, may have been with Yattir i S. 30" (Klo., Sm.). — And
from these went forth the Zor athites and the Eshta'olites]. From
these families or the Mishraites alone came the inhabitants of
Zor ah (mod. Surah, SWP. III. p. 158) Jos. 19^' Ju. 13^ 25^ etc.,
and of Eshta'ol (mod. Eshua near Surah, SWP. II. p. 25) Jos.
15" 19^' Ju. 13", etc. — 54f. The sons of Salma] the heading of the
following places and families. On Salma cf. vv. " ^i. — Netopha-
thites] Ne. 12", cf. 2 S. 23" 2 K. 25", the inhabitants of Netophah,
7
98 I CHRONICLES
Ezr. 2" Ne. 7", probably a village near Bethlehem, identified with
the ruin Um Toba north of Bethlehem {SWP. III. p. 52), or pos-
sibly Beit Nettif (Rob. Res. II. pp. 16/., but see Baed." p. 124). —
Aiaroth-betli-jo'ab] an unknown place. — Half the Manahtites the
Zorites]. Cf. v.'-. One half of this otherwise unknown family
seems to have dwelt at Kirjath-jearim and the other at Zorah. —
And families of the scribes inhabiting Jabez, Tir'athites, Shim'a-
thites, Sucathites]. The mention of the scribes shows clearly that
we have a post-exilic notice, since it is doubtful whether families
of them existed earlier. The location of Jabez is unknown, cf.
4' '•. In the three families Jerome recognised three different
classes of religious functionaries, U canentes atqite resonantes et in
tabernaculis commorantes. © explains somewhat similarly, except
that the Sucathites are those "covered" with a spirit of prophecy.
Be. follows 'H, except that he regards the first class as gate-keepers
(Aram, ynn =Heb. "lj?y). We. (DGJ. pp. 30/.) finds underlying
the three names nj^iri a technical term for sacred music, nyt^ty
the Halacha or sacred tradition, and n^lw' which he connects,
following Be. and H, with n31D booth (so also Ki.). Buhl
(HWB.'^) derives the last two names from unknown places. Ke.
interprets as descendants from the unknown Tira, Shemei and
Sucah. Bn. finds too obscure to explain. — These are the Kenites
who came from Hammath f the father of the house of Rechab] an
obscure statement. The Rechabites, Je. 35^ «-, probably became
an integral part of the post-exilic Jews, and families of scribes,
perhaps from their ancient loyalty to Yahweh (2 K. lo'^ '■), seem
to have been reckoned as belonging to them along with their other
connection with Salma. That the Rechabites were also Kenites
(Ju. 1 15 4" I S. 155) is not improbable. An indication of their
position in post-exilic Judaism may be seen in the fact that one of
their number, Malchijah ben Rechab, was the overseer of one of
the Judean districts, Ne. 3".
42. jnan on nri:; ij3i iv 10s Nin n:3 r-"S '?x?:m' 'nx 3*^3 'J3i].
This text is probably corrupt. 05 has nris instead of >".:"2 which Ki.
follows and strikes out "^n before ]^-\2n as a gloss {Kom., BH.). yr^s
following SiScmi may have arisen from the preceding i'Si^Sx v. ■"
(a similar confusion from the present text appears in d, where in place of
m. 1-24.] DESCENDANTS OF DAVID 99
yy^o, the text has j;r;!r''SN), and nr-in may be a transmuted dittography
of ya'''D with >jji added. Under this conjecture the original text as far
as can be restored was ]^-\2n >3ni fiv "'2S Nin noa . . . Sxrimi ^ns 3*^3 ^jj.
A first-born who occupied perhaps first the district of Ziph, or small
town Ziph, and later Hebron, is a not unnatural supposition from
the story of Caleb's relation to Hebron given in Jos. 14^ ^- 15''. It is
also possible that yir^a has fallen out before n^'iD through the simi-
larity of names. — 44. a;'!"!"!^] cf. D>"'p'' Jos. 1556. The two names are
without doubt identical. — 47. yy^>] (B^ TrjpffojfjL, cf. ^ ^ojyap, which, even
if corrupt, supports p in the ^ text, hence Ki. ff^^?.. — 48. i'?^]. The
subject HDyo requires n^'^^^, Ges. § 145M. — 49. e]-;y •i'?ni] to be read
(]•;•>:? iS-'i, since ^';~> has already been mentioned in v. ", and v. " most
probably is its continuation. We. DG/. p. 19, Ki. — 50. p] some mss.,
<B, U 'j3, required since several sons of Hur are enumerated. — 51 . n::Sj']
C5^^ SaXwiUcbj/. — 52. nxin] read nixi. This correction is made ac-
cording to 4=, since the former is meaningless, so Ki. — nnjcn] \-'.njDn
according to v. ". — 55. -i^u'^] Qr. ''3V'i\
III. 1-24. The descendants of David.
1-9. David's children.^ — The sources of this list are 2 S. 3^-5
^n-16 joi. With the exception of Amnon, Adonijah, Absalom,
Solomon J and the daughter Tamar, these children are known
only by name. Some names have suffered in our passage through
transcription. Instead of Daniel v. ' we should read after 2 S. 3'
Chileah (y. i.). Otherwise the names of the sons born in Hebron
present no variations. Of those bom in Jerusalem the Chronicler
gives Shun a (SyuJw') v. ^ for Shammua {'^^^2'^) 2 S. 5'% Elish-
ama (yD'w"'^S) v. « for Elishud (yi:r''^S) 14' 2 S. S'^ which
should be read here (Bn., Ki.). The textual corruption in this
latter case is very evident, since Elishama appears as the name of a
son in V. ' 2 S. 5'=. The two names EUphelet (l^'/D'^^S) v. % and
Nogah (n^i) V. ^, which are wanting in 2 S., have clearly been
developed in transcription and should be struck from the text (Ki.).
Instead of Eljadd (JJT''?^) (v. « 2 S. 5"), the original true name
probably was Baaljadd (y"i'''?J<'2), given in 14', the change
having been made to avoid the use of Baal (Ki., Dr. TS.). Bath-
shiia (yiD"n3) V. ^ instead of Bath-sheba {']^2U riD) 2 S., i K.,
is a phonetic variation arising from the similar sound of 2 bh
and 1 w. The length of David's reign in Hebron and of that in
Jerusalem are taken from 2 S. 5^
lOO I CHRONICLES
1. jnana hSni] 2 S. 32 jnana d>j3 in'? n^vv — nSij] on con-
struction, see Dav. Syn. § 81 R. 3. — nisan] 2 S. niD3 ^7\^y. — ■■jr]
read with 01 ''JK'l?, c/. other ordinals with an. 2 S. 3' has inji»Di.— Vn'-ji]
a corruption of ^nSd of 2 S. where (6 has AaXoi^ta = nsSi, so also
(gAL here, but " Aa/xviriX. These variations point to a corruption of stthz
into nx'^T into '?n'j-i, so Ki. In favour of this are the errors of trans-
mission in vv. ^'- {v. s.). The name of the second son of David still
remains doubtful, however, since the name 3nSd occurs nowhere except
in 2 S. 33 and ax*? looks like a dittography, see Stenning, DB., art.
Chileab. — S^j'^s^] 2 S. + ''^^i nii'x, but <S there agrees with Ch. — 2.
Di'?B'3xS] twenty mss. and 2 S. omit '^ — 3. '^a''3N^] 2 S. 3* Sa'3N p, but (^
there read 'wsS. & has been corrected from i^ of 2 S. — ina-x] 2 S. 3' nti^a
in. # corrected from 2 S. — 4. iS I'^ij n^*;*] 2 S. inS nS'' hSn. &
conflates. — 5. njinSsi] cf. 14* =28. $^*. — i-i'7ij] point with many
MSS. ■n';'ij, Ges. § 6gL — NjjD-i'] 14^ 2 S. 5'* iirou', c/. i S. i63. — i'liy ra'']
one MS., B, 2 S. II and i K. i ;»?c' nj, (& Bripa-dpec {v. s.). — 6. jrctriSNi]
two MSS., 145, 2 S. 5'5 yitt* — (11. 5.). — 6. 7. njji t3'?fl'''?si] wanting in 2 S.
(f. 5.). — 8. jj-i^Sn] 147 jniS>'3i {v. s.). — n-;'yn] must be read n3;att> after
striking out njji bSd^Sni (i;. s.).
10-14. The line of descent from Solomon to Josiah.
— These are the kings of Judah who reigned during this
period.
15-16. From Josiah to Jehoiachin. — 15. The sons of Jo-
siah]. The four sons are mentioned because with Josiah the
regular succession from father to son of the kings of Judah ceased.
Their names and order of enumeration present difficulties. Three
sons of Josiah are mentioned in 2 K. whose births were in the fol-
lowing order: Jehoiakim, 2 K. 23'^; Jehoahaz, 2 K. 233'; Zedekiah,
2 K. 24'8. According to Je. 22" Shallum was another name of
Jehoahaz. The Chronicler then has either given Johanan an
otherwise unknown eldest son of Josiah, and has misplaced in re-
spect to birth Shallum, who should be recorded as older than Zede-
kiah (Shallum and Zedekiah were sons of the same mother Hamu-
tal, 2 K. 233' 24'*), or Johanan stands for Jehoahaz (as a copyist
error, Ki.) and Shallum was regarded as still a different son. — 16.
The sons of Jehoiakim]. On the plural sons cf. 2'. — Jeconiah]
Je. 24' 292, called also Coniah, Je. 2224- ^s 371^ the king Jehoiachin
2 K. 248 -'5. — Zedekiah his son] is otherwise unknown; probably
an error, having arisen because Zedekiah succeeded upon the
m. 1-24.] DESCENDANTS OF DAVID lOI
throne his nephew Jehoiachin (r/. v. ", 2 K. 24"). The state-
ment may be from a glossator.
17-24. The house of David from the captivity in the line
of Jehoiachin. — 17 f. And the sons of Jeconiah the captive
She'alti'el his son and Malchiram and Pedaiah and Shen'azzar,
Jekamiah, Hoshama and Nedabiah], The adjective captive
(assir "iDK) having lost the art. was taken in (5, H, ®, also AV.,
RVm., as a proper name. In ^ it makes a part of the following
name. Kimchi, followed by some of the older commentators, re-
garded the last six as sons of Shealtiel, since Zerubbabel v. ■'
appears in Hg. i'- '^ '* et al. Ezr. 3- et al. as his son, i.e., grandson.
But the copula before Malchiram suggests the usual interpretation,
i. e., that all of them were sons of Jeconiah. ^ introduces his
son (122) after each name, giving a continuous line of descent
from Jeconiah, and in v. '' Pedaiah is omitted and Zerubbabel
and Shimei are made the sons of the preceding Nedabiah.
This last is clearly wrong. Of these sons nothing further is
known unless Shenazzar is identical with Sheshbazzar "the
prince of Judah" (Ezr. i^- "). This is probable {cf. Meyer,
Enist. Jiid. pp. 75^-, Rothstein, die Genealogie des K. Jojachin,
p. 29) {v. i.). Koster regards Shenazzar as a fiction of the Chron-
icler in order to make of the Persian officer an Israelite (Wieder-
stellung Israels, pp. 28 /. 40). Meyer regards the Davidic
descent as real. Rothstein identifies Shenazzar with Pedaiah
{op. cit. pp. 27 ff.). — 19. The sons of Pedaiah Zerubbabel
and Shimei]. In Ezr. 3^ s 52 Ne. 12' Hg. i'- ''■ '^ 2'- ", cf. Mt. i''
Lk. 3", Zerubbabel who was the prince of Judah under whom the
Jews returned from Babylon is called the son of Shealtiel. This
also is the reading of (S^^, Salathiel taking the place of Pedaiah.
d^ also omits Shimei. The usual explanation, however, has been
that Pedaiah was Zerubbabel's real father, but succeeding Shealtiel,
of whom no sons are mentioned, as the head of the family of David
or Judah, Zerubbabel was called his son. Of Shimei nothing
further is known. — And the sons* of Zerubbabel : Meshullani (cf.
5") and Hananiah and Shelomith their sister] otherwise un-
known; the unusual mention of the daughter Shelomith shows
either a marked personality or the founder of a family. — 20. And
I02 I CHRONICLES
Hashubah f and Ohel | and Berechiah and Hasadiah f , Jnshab-
hesed f jive\ are also otherwise entirely unknown. It is not
evident why these sons should have been enumerated as five;
possibly they were children of one mother or born in Pal-
estine after the return (Be.) (see text. n.). The names of
Zerubbabcl's children have been thought to express the hopes
of Israel at that time, McshuUam meaning "Recompensed,"
cf. Is. 42"; Hananiah, "Yahweh is gracious"; Shelomith,
"Peace"; Hashubah, "Consideration"; Ohel, "Tent," i. e.,
"Dwelling place of Yahweh"; Berechiah, "Yahw-eh blesses";
Hasadiah, "Yahweh is kind"; Jushab-hesed, "Kindness returns"
(Be.). — 21. And the son of Hananiah Pelatiah and Jesha iah], on
son for sons, cf. 2\ — tJie so7is of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, the
sons of Obadiah, the sons of Shecaniah]. This list has been inter-
preted in two ways, (i) Hananiah was the father of six sons
before four of whom sons was written because they were
founders of distinguished families of the time of the writer (Be.).
(2) From sons of Rephaiah to the end of the chapter is a genealog-
ical fragment representing branches of the family of David, whose
connection with Zerubbabel was unascertainable (Ke., ]Mov. p.
30). Instead of ^^2 (^, V, ^ have 1j2 "his son" and the verse
reads And the son of Hananiah ivas Pelatiah and Jeshiah his son,
and Arnan Jiis son, and Obadiah his son, and Shecaniah his son.
This is preferred by Bn., Ki., Kuenen, Einl. pp. 114 /. et al.
and brings the descendants of David, including those of w. -■-"*,
to eleven generations after Zerubbabel, and thus, it may well
be assumed, to the time of the Chronicler {v. Intro, pp. 5 /.). —
22-24. Of the persons here named nothing further is known. In
v." the sons of Shemaiah are enumerated as six. Since only
five are given, a name has either fallen from the text, or we
should omit and the sons of Shemaiah and read and Hattush {v. i.).
None of the names here given as descendants of Zerubbabel
appear in the genealogies of Christ recorded in Mt. i' «• Lk.
3" °-. Some have thought to identify or connect Hattush with
the one recorded in Ezr. 8-. Ki. holds that if this is the case
he is the son of Shecaniah and, as mentioned, and the sons of
Shemaiah should be struck out. Then and the sons at the begin-
m. 1-24.] DESCENDANTS OF DAVID 103
ning of the verse is correct and the number six is accounted for.
The name Hattush, however, is not infrequent (Ne. 3'° lo^ 12'-).
17-24. Rothstein in his somewhat fanciful monograph on these verses
{op. cit. s.) presents the following: In vv. '^ '• read n^oxn and omit iJ3
at end of v. ''. Shealtiel and Malchiram were born before Jehoiachin
was released by Evil-Merodach and were probably put to death by
Nebuchadrezzar, in view of the rebellious character of the Jews, that the
line of David might be childless. The name Shealtiel, " I have asked of
God," was given because the father had prayed for a son, and the name
Malchiram, ' My king is exalted," because it was of double meaning,
a possible expression of allegiance to the Babylonian king or of trust in
Yahweh the King. Pedaiah and the other sons were born after their
father's deliverance. This is revealed in the meaning of Pedaiah,
"Yahweh hath redeemed," and of the other compounds of Yahweh,
which are similar expressions of hope and trust. Shenazzar on the other
hand is not the name of another son, but the Babylonian name of
Pedaiah which reappears in the Sheshbazzar of Ezr. i ». Sheshbazzar and
Pedaiah are the same person. The correctness of Pedaiah's fatherhood
of Zeriihhabel (v. 's) is maintained. Zerubbabel's name implies his birth
in Babylon, while his brother Shimei=Shemaiah "Yahweh hath heard"
was born in Palestine. At the beginning of v. ^o read a'?tt'D '•J3 {v. also
5.) and revise the names reading noc'n "Yahweh considers," instead of
n2-2fn (v. s.), and Ss^n^ ('^vSin^) "Yahweh causes to live," instead of "^nN
(v. 5.) and n^i^p "Yahweh brings quietness," instead of non 2t'v
{v. s.). V. -' should read nijr^i . . . niflni n^yii'M nvjSij n'jjn ^>:2^, the
verse mentioning only the sons of Hananiah, 'J3 being repeated through
copyist error. Instead of jnx read n^nx. In v. " eliminate n^yiiZ' •<i2^
as copyist error and read fiam. hav is an equivalent for Snji^ and in
place of the unexampled nnj read nnrj; and instead of r\-'-\^': read
n\-<"j. In v. " read 'J3i instead of pi. The remaining names of the
section, in vv. "f.^ are correctly transmitted and full of meaning. In
T/I.^St* "Unto Yahweh are mine eyes" is a confession and prayer of
trust in Yahweh for the fulfilment of promised deliverance from present
humiliation.
17. ids] read iDxn, the preceding word ending in n has caused the
loss of the art. — 18. -isnj'.:'!] has been identified with -\^tz<Z' of Ezr. i^
(v. s.). A comparison of the Greek MSS. of i Esd. 2" and 2 Esd. i'
shows that 'Lava^aa-ffapos was the original form in (& of Ezr., hence
•\-i2Z'-y probably read -\-i2yy originally. — jj^cin] is either abbreviated
from MHi, or a textual error (BDB.). — 19. r^-'^s] 05"^ + iomss. '^x\-i'^Na'
may be a correction from Hg. or Ezr. {v. s.), either by the original
translator or by a later scribe. Possibly something has fallen from the
I04 I CHRONICLES
text after nno.-jai] read with some mss., <S, &, "jai, so Kau., Ki., Bn.
— 20. Since seven sons and one daughter are inconsistent with the clos-
ing word ccn, Bn. regards this verse as a later interpolation. Ki.
suggests the insertion of aV^'s -j^i at the beginning {BH., so also Roth-
stein, op. cit.). — 21. pi] some mss., ®, &, ®, 'jav — j2] ®, B, (&) four
times 1J3 -t- 1J3 at the end {v. s.). — 22. n^jjs' 'J3i] may be an error for
IV ]2\ so ®, B, ^ (but z*. 5.). — 23. pi] read with some mss., (S, 3,
^J3i. — 24. inv-jin] Qr. in^T^, ^-^ J25outa (so ^ in 5-' 9'), B Oduia =
IV. 1-23. Fragmentary genealogies of families of Judah.
The meaning, date, and connection of these genealogical notices are
very if not entirely obscure. They look almost like a gathering of genea-
logical pebbles rolled together from various quarters, consisting of
older and younger parts that are kept together only by the common con-
nection with the tribe of Judah (Zoe.). Several of the leading "fathers"
are Calebites, i.e., Shobal, Hur, Ashhur, Chelub, Kenaz, Othniel, and
Caleb. Hence the lists represent members of that clan, and Caleb
should be substituted for Carmi in v.' (We., Ki., Zoe.). Whether the
names and relationships reflect pre-ex. conditions or post-ex. is difficult
to determine. Ki. in SBOT. regarded the passage, with the excep-
tion of v. ' and a few phrases, as from the older sources of Ch. along
with 22«-" <2-^5. 47. 49_ We.'s view is similar, that in the main pre-ex.
conditions are reflected. Be. held, on the other hand, from the mention
of a number of the names in the history given in Ezr. and Ne., that we
have a classification of the tribe of Judah actually made in the time
between Zerubbabel and Ezra, so that these apparently broken and
incoherent genealogies were plain to the readers of the time of the
Chronicler. Meyer also finds in the passage a reflection of the same
conditions when the Calebites had settled westward in Judah (Enlste-
hung p. 164). Bn. finds also post-exilic conditions {Kom. p. 13). Ki.
in Kom. adopts this view.
1. Introduction. — The sons of Judah; Perez, Hezron, Caleb*,
Hur, Shobal]. ^ and all Vrss. have Carmi (^12*13), but clearly
from 2^- 5- '• =° we should read Caleb (We., Ki., Zoe., Bn.) (per-
haps originally *'2'?3 easily transmuted into ''ISI^, cf. 2' ''2"i'?3).
According to 2^- '• '^ '■ 5° these sons of Judah are not co-ordinate,
but after the analog)' of i', a line of descent. The treatment, how-
ever, in the following ^'^'. suggests co-ordinate sons of whom the
youngest, Shobal, is considered first, v. ', then the next older, Hur,
v\. '-'"j and then the next, Caleb, w. "•". Next should follow sons
IV. 1-23.] GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH I05
of Hezron and of Perez. The sons of Shelah w, 2'-" may then
be regarded as an appendi.x.
Bn. finds in v. " either a fragment of tlie line of Hezron and in vv.
I'-'-o the Une of Perez; or following 2"'' (as the text stands!) where Ashhur
is a son of Hezron, the line of Hur having been restricted to vv. '-< and
that of Hezron through Ashhur appearing in 2^* + 45-' », he regards these
verses (2-* + 4'-"') as the original Hezron list of c. 4, which originally
stood after the Caleb list, vv. "-'\ and he holds also The sons of Perez
were Jehallelel and Ezrah to have fallen out before vv. '^-2", and thus he
would bring everything into order. Ki. adopts essentially this second
alternative. Both Bn. and Ki. regard the sons of Shelah, vv. ^i 23, as a
later addition.
2-10. Sons of Shobal and Hur. — 2. And Reaiah the son of
Shobal]. Cf. 2". ReaiaJi is a family name among those who
returned with Zerubbabel, Ezr. 2^' Ne. y'". — Jahath] is a fre-
quent Levite name (6^' -'^ <". 43) 23'" '• 24" 2 Ch. 3412 |). —
Ahumai f and Lahad f] entirely obscure. Instead of Ahiimai
we should probably read after (g Ahimai (Gray, HPN. p. 279),
especially if a compound of riH, since all other proper names
which are compounds are spelled thus (see list under nS, BDB.).
— These are families of the Zorathites]. Cf. 2", where Zoralh-
ites are connected with families of Kiriath-jearim whose father
was Shobal. Zorah, mentioned in Ne. 11", was a residence of
post-exilic Jews, and hence of interest to the Chronicler. Ki.
(SBOT.) regards v. =='> as from a later hand than v.^\ — 3. And
these are the sons of II iir* father of 'Etam\ |^ is meaningless.
This restoration is the most plausible {v. i.). 'Etam is obscure.
Since Hur appears in v. ^ as the founder of Bethlehem, we might
conclude (adopting the reading above) that v. ' refers to the post-
exilic localities of the Calebites and identify Etam with the one
near Bethlehem (2 Ch. ii«) mod. Ain Aitam (Bn.) (Etam, DB.).
But lezreel and Gedor, the names of towns of southern Judah
(Jos. 15"-"), suggest that our record is of pre-exilic conditions and
Etam may be the one in Simeon near Rimmon, cf. v. '^ No de-
cision can be reached. — Ishma |] and Idbash f] are entirely
obscure, also their sister Hazzelelponi or the Zelelponite f or Zelel
shade {cf. Zillah Gn. 4") {v. i.). — 4. Penu'el and 'Ezer] persons,
Io6 I CHRONICLES
families, or localities otherwise unknown. The former cannot be
connected with Penuel east of the Jordan (Bn. mentions Peniiel a
clan of Benjamin 8=^); 'Ezer may be identified with 'Ezrah v. ''.—
The location of Hiishah is unknown. Two heroes of David's
guard were Hushites, 2 S. 2i'8 23" i Ch. 11" 20^ 27". — Gedor].
Cf. V. '8 12', mentioned with Halhul and Beth-zur, Jos. 15^8^ and
generally identified with mod. Jedur (Rob., Res.= ii. p. 13), six and
one-half miles north from Hebron. Beth-gader (2^') is the same
place. — These are the sons oj Hiir the first horn of Ephrathah the
father of Bethlehem]. Cf. 2^'> ' . The words after Hiir are ace. to
Ki. (SBOT.) a gloss.— 5. Ashfiur]. Cf 2'-*.— Father of Tekoa'] a
gloss ace. to Ki. (SBOT.) cf 2-^ — The reference under the wives
HeVah and Na arah is obscure. No such places or districts have
been identified in Judah. (A town Na'arah was on the borders
of Ephraim, Jos. 16'.) Possibly Naarah (n"iyj), "maiden," is
enigmatic, denoting earlier settlements or conditions, and Helah
{r\^hr\)y "weak," later and less favourable ones. The names of
several children of both wives, however, may be connected with
southern Judah, the pre-exilic home of the Calebites. — 6. Ahuzzam
f]. Cf. Ahuzzath the friend of Abimelech, Gn. 26=^ — Heplier] the
name of a town mentioned with Tappuah (Jos. 12'') and Socoh
I K. 4'°, and hence evidently of southern Judah. — Temeni f ] the
word (•'il^Tl) means a Southerner, i. e., of southern Judah, cf.
Teman (patronymic •'JDTl) the name of Edom, Gn. ^6", etc. —
A?id the Ahashtarites f] (nnu'nS'n) entirely obscure. The word
has been given a Persian origin (BDB.). Be. thought there was no
occasion for this. A textual corruption, however, may underlie it
and the reference still be to early abodes or families of the Calebites.
Or it may have originally stood without the connective in apposi-
tion with the preceding names, being, at the time of the Chronicler,
a family name of those who traced their origin to the places of
southern Judah previously mentioned. Possibly also it simply
summarises the previous families as the Ashhurites (EBi. II. col.
192 1 ) (v. i.).—7. Zereth f and Zohar *]. The latter is the family
name of Ephron of Hebron, Gn. 238 25', and of a son of Simeon,
Gn. 46'°. — Ethnan] (i^ns) probably identical with Ithnan
(pn'') a city of southern Judah Jos. 15".— 8. And Koz]. The
IV. 1-23.] GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH I07
abrupt introduction of Koz is striking. Perhaps he has fallen
from the list of the sons of Helah and should be supplied, so QI.
He is thus restored at the end of v. ' by Ki. {v. i.). Possibly his
name was struck out from these lists intentionally, since Hakkoz
appears as a post-exilic priestly family (24'" Ezr. 2=' Ne. 7") and
the writer desired that the Judean Calebite or non-Levitical origin
of this family might not appear. The identity of names, however,
mav be purely accidental (r/. 24'°). — ' Aniib f ] probably to be con-
nected with 'Anab (23^), Jos. 15^°, a town near Debir, mod.
'Anab {SWP. III. pp. 392 /.). The names Koz {^'^'p) thorn, and
'Anuh (3*Ji?) grape, suggest an allegory, a thorn here bringing forth
a grape, cf. Mt. 7'* (Zoe.). — Of Zobebah f and the families of
Aharhel f son of H arum f nothing further is kno\^^l. Instead of
Zobebah probably Ja'bez should be read {v. i.). — 9. And Ja'bcz
was more honorable than his brethren]. The abrupt introduction
of Ja'bez if not corrupted into Zobebah (v. ») is striking. He
probably belonged to the family of Koz and was the reputed
founder of Jabez (2^^)^ and hence represents Calebite scribes of the
family of Hur who had enjoyed some special prosperity. The
cause of this prosperity is given in vv. ^t. 10. His mother had given
bJm a name of ill omen, but he had prayed that its significance
might not be fulfilled and God granted his request. — Now his
mother called his name Jabez (j^^y) saying I have borne him with
pain (3i'J?)] a popular etymology and explanation of the name
Jabez. Cf. similar explanations of the names Moab and Ammon
(Gn. 19" ' ), and of the sons of Jacob (Gn. 29'^ 33. 35 ^o^ \ etc.).
The transposition of the letters 2'^^ to |>2V is noticeable. The
name is equivalent to 3'i'y'', meaning He caiiseth pain. — 10. And
Ja'bez called on the God of Israel saying, Oh that thou woiildest
surely bless me and enlarge my border and that thy hand woidd be
with me and thou wouldest keep back evil so that no sorrow shouldest
befall me/]. A prayer that the evil signified by his name might
be averted. — And God granted that which he asked]. This ex-
plains V. '".
3. C'J'y 13N n'^.xi] some MSS. ■'J3 instead of ^3n and others "aN-^ja;
(6 Kal oDtol viol Airdu; & v-SfXtl^l) ^oialO ,-t\oiO, And these
arc the sons of Aminadab; H Ista quoque stirps Elam. Something
Io8 I CHRONICLES
seems to have fallen from 1|. Kau. follows <8. Ki. on nin 'J3 nSsi
c:;^>' {And these are the sous of Hur the father of ' Etam) (also Bn.). —
'Jid':'''Si] may be read the Zelelponite or taken as a personal name
Zelelponi, meaning, Give shade thou that tiirnest to me (BDB.)- It
is better to see in "jid a dittography from the following Snud. The
name then is S'^sn or perhaps '^'^x. One is tempted to write SnSx
shade of Cod. — 6. Bins] some MSS., 01 crnx, B Oozam. — •'-irs'nNr]
perhaps a corruption of '-(in-^'Nn the Ashhurites {v. s.). — 7. inxi] read
with Qr. -\rri\ (& Kal Zaap. — ]iT■ti^] S + Tip'', adopted by Klo. PRE.^
iv. 94, followed by Ki., Bn. — 8. Ki. following Klo. inserts 1*3]?'
among the sons of W, also suggesting as possible that n32in = yap
— 9. V3">] in popular etymology derived from 3XJ' {v. s.). It is not
necessary to suppose with Klo. that the name read 3X>"'', cf. y^. — 10.
bn] a particle of wishing, BDB. bn ib (3), Ges. § 1515, or of con-
dition with conclusion suppressed, Oe., Kau., Ges. § 167a. — nj-np n'»c>i]
is difficult to translate. <& yvuffiv = njn';. The readings nyi*: and
nsij? have been suggested. Ki. thinks an error lies in the verb and
reads '3 niim. Better retain M. — oxy \nSaS] noun-suffix as object of
T T • ; T -* -■
inf., Ges. § 115c; penult syllable closed, Ges. § 61a.
11-15. The sons of Caleb, — 11. And CaJitb] i.e., Caleb
(cf. 2 9 and above on v. •). — Of Shuhah f nothing is kno\\-n. <g
has in place of the brother of Shuhah, " the father of Achsah " Jos.
i5»6, clearly a makeshift in an obscure passage. Buhl (HWB.''-)
suggests the reading Hushah, cf. v. ■". — Mehir f ] and Eshton f ]
are also entirely obscure. — 12. Beth-rapJia] a place or family
otherwise unkno\\-n. A Benjaminite Rapha is mentioned 8=, and
Kapha collective sing., or plural Raphaim (mss. vary), 2o< refer to
the giant aboriginal race of Palestine. A vale (.tCy) of Rephaim
near Jerusalem is also mentioned, Jos. 15 « i8'« 2 S. 5>'- ". —
Paseah'\ a post-exilic family name of Nethinim, Ezr. 2^' Ne. 7^1, cf.
Ne. 3«. — Tehinnah ^father of the city Nahash\ This looks like
a reference to some post-exilic Jewish settlement, but is utterly
obscure. — Recah f ]. (g^^ (probably original ^, see text, n.) have
Recab, and this probably furnishes the true reading and explana-
tion of the families given in \^'. " '■. They were Recabites, cf. 2".
— 13. And the sons of Kenaz 'OthnVel and Seraiah]. Cf. Ju. i^'
where Othniel is called the son of Kenaz, and is either the nephew
or brother of Caleb (Moore in loco favours the latter). Othniel
probably represeiits a clan. Seraiah (not an infrequent name
IV. 1-23.] GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH I09
from the time of David onward) as the brother of Othniel is
mentioned only here. It smacks so strongly of an individual and
the later period of Israel's history that it probably represents a
post-exilic connection, cf. v. 14 {cj. Gray, HPN. p. 236). — And
the sons of Othni'el Hathath f] entirely obscure. — 14. And
Meonothai f] (TiJlyd) probably represents inhabitants of
Ma' on, cf. 2". One would expect a connection with Othniel to
have been indicated. Possibly Hathath represents a mutilation
by copyist of Meonothai or its original, or perhaps and Meono-
thai has fallen from the text after Hathath {v. i.). — Ophrah]
entirely unknown. The word occurs as the name of the city of
Benjamin, Jos. iS^^ i S. 13'", and also as that of one of Manasseh
Ju. 6'". — And Seraiah begat Joah the father of the Ge-harashim]
i.e., Valley of Craftsmen, for they were craftsmen]. Ge-harashim
is mentioned with Lod and Ono Ne. ii^s and it mav be identified
with the ruin Hirsha east of Lydda (DB.). Of this Joab nothing
further is known. Probably a Kenizzite Othnielite Seraiah was
the reputed father of a Joab who established a post-exilic colony
or settlement of craftsmen near Ono and Lod. Indeed in post-
exilic times if not earlier the Kenites, whom some have regarded as
the smiths or craftsmen of ancient Israel (Sayce, Art. Kenite, DB.),
may have been reckoned as Calebites. — 15. And the sons of
Caleb the son of Jephunneh] Nu. 32'2 Jos. i4«- ". The link con-
necting Caleb with Kenaz is apparently omitted as well known.
The enumeration of descendants of Othniel before those of Caleb
son of Jephunneh is in accordance with the method in this chapter
of mentioning the younger members of a family first, cf. Shobal
v. 2 before Hur, and Hur before Caleb or Kenaz. — Caleb the son of
Jephunneh] a Kenizzite, Jos. i4«- '% one of the twelve spies whom
Moses sent into Canaan, Nu. 13^ 14% who was rewarded for this
service with the ancient city of Hebron, Jos. i^^K — Ir f * and
Elah f and Na am f] entirely obscure. One is tempted to join Ir
(T^J?) city, with Elah and find a reference to the city Elath (H^S =
riTS), Dill., Gn. 36^'. At all events Elah is an Edomxitic name
which may be seen in El-paran (pS ^''^^) the wilderness south of
Judah. Possibly post-exilic Calebites looked upon the ancient
Edomitic city of Elath as having belonged once to their clan. —
no I CHRONICLES
And the sotis of Elah, Kenaz^\ This statement is surprising unless
Elah as suggested is the name of the district of Elath or El-paran,
which might have been the early home of the Kenizzites, or the
name of the tribe of which Kenaz was an offshoot. Ki. thinks a
name has fallen from the text and that another son was enumer-
ated with Kenaz. Both Bn. and Ki. regard v. '^ as an insertion.
This is probable; some one missed an allusion to Caleb the hero of
Judah and inserted a bit of genealogical lore concerning him.
11. nniB' 'ns 21^31] (5 Kal XaX^jS iraxTjp A^xaCs) is a correction from
2". — 12. trnj] (6^^ + ddeXcpoO 'E<re\ojfj.{i') roO Xev€^{e)[, L a. AOdofj. r.
Kevi^aiov, adopted by Bn., Ki., since it supplies a connecting link
with V. '3. Ki. recognises the difficulty raised by this unknown EcreXw/*
being represented as a son of Tehinnah and of Kenaz at the same time,
which he e.xplains as a mixture of families. But Eo-eXw/x is merely a
corruption of Effe^wv (cf. (&^ Addofi.) = ii.-i::'n, hence (^ read iins'S >ns
v:pn which in turn originally was "JP 'N 'N, the brother of Eshton was
Kenaz, an early gloss to connect with v. ".— n^i] ^^l 'Ptj-x^d^ of which
A Trida is a corruption, hence (S = 3^^, cf. 2^^. — 13. nrin] (^^ + Kal
'Maojvade'., B et Maonathi = \7iji37ni, adopted by Bn. and Ki. — 15a;3.
^ .T?s n^>- (gB 'Hp 'Mai, a 'Hpa' 'AXA, 3 Hir et Ela = n'r-Ni ■^-•, so
Ki. This we have adopted. We. [DGJ. p. 39) retaining ll| sees in
n>y an equivalent of Di>;', a duke of Edom 1". — 15b, ij^i upi n'^.s]
some MSS., (B, 1, QI ijp n'^s ijai. Possibly a transposition should be
made and we should read tjp ^ja hSn, these are the sons of Kenaz
referring to the contents of vv. "-". The clause then would be
a gloss, since vv. 's--" without doubt continue the list of Calebites.
Ki. Kom. supposes something to have fallen from the text before rjpi.
16-20. Sons of Perez? — 16. Jehallerel] only here and as a
personal or family name of the sons of Merari (2 Ch. 19").
Since the connection of Jehallelel and Ezrah (v.") is not given,
Ki. following Bn. [v. s.) supplies: "And the sons of Perez,
Jehallelel and Ezrah." In view of the sonship of Ziph one is
tempted in the place of Jehallelel to read Jerahmeel, since in 2"
Ziph is the son of Mesha, son of Caleb, brother of Jerahmeel
{EBi. II. col. 2346).— Z7>/a]. Cf. 2*\—Zipha f] fem. of Ziph,
possibly a dittography. — Tiria f ] and Asar'el f] entirely obscure.
The latter may be a form of Israel (see text. note). — 17*. And
the sons* of Ezrah] Ezrah possibly same as Ezer v. ^ — Jether]
IV. 1-23.] GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH III
common name, cj. 2^'^. — Mered f]. — Epher] name of son of
Mldian i" On. 25^, and of member of tribe of Manasseh ^~\ —
Jalon f]. — 17^ f. ^, repeated in H, AV., RV., gives incomplete
meaning. Usually the clauses arc rearranged as follows: ('»'')
And these are tlie sons of Bilhiah f the daughter of Pharaoh,
whom Mered took, i.e., to wife, ('"'■) and she conceived [and bore]
Miriam and Shammai and Jishhah f the father of Eshtemoa (i^^)
and his Jewess wife bore Jcrcd the father of Gedor and Tfcber
the father of Soco and JckuthVel f the father of Zanoah (Be.,
Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau.). (^ adopted by Ki., requiring only a slight
change in the text, gives the following : And J ether begot Miriam
and Shammai and Jishbah the father of Eshtemoa and his Jewish
wife bore Jered the father of Gedor and Tlcber the father of Soco and
J ekuthiel father of Zenoah; and these are the sons of Bithiah the
daughter of Phara oh whom Mered took . . . The names of the
sons of ISIered by Bithiah must then have fallen from the text.
This rendering presents three lines of maternal descent among the
grandsons of Ezrah (v. ''"), since a Calebite wife must be assumed
where none is particularly mentioned. — Miriam] elsewhere in the
OT. only of Moses' sister, is here evidently a man's name. — Sham-
mai]. Cf. 2=8. — Eshtemoa] 6" <"' Jos. 155° 21'^ i S. 30-' the
present village es Semii'a south of Hebron {SWP. III. p. 412). —
Jered f ] except antediluvian patriarch, Gn. 5'^ ^ . — Heber] a name
also of the son of Asher 7'' ' Gn. 46" Nu. 26^^^ of a Benjaminite
8", and of the Kcnite husband of Jael Ju. 4"- "■ =' 5=^ In this
last is an association with southern Judah. Cf. also Hebron
containing the same root. — Gedor]. Cf. v.". — Soco]. Two places
bore this name, one near the valley of Elah Jos. i^'^^ i S. 17' i K.
4>'> 2 Ch. II' 28'8 modern Kh. Shuweikeh {SWP. III. p. 53; Rob.
BR.^ II. pp. 20/.), and the other south-west of Hebron near Eshte-
moa, Jos. 15^8, also identified, modern name same as the other
{SWP. III. pp. 404, 410; Rob. BR.^ I. p. 494). This latter is
probably the one here mentioned. — Zanoah]. Two places also
bore this name, one near Beth-shemesh, Jos. 15'^ Ne. 3" 11",
mod. Zanu'a {SWP. III. p. 128; Rob. BR.= II. p. 16), the other
south-west of Hebron, Jos. 15", mod. Kh. Zanuta {SWP. III. pp.
404. 410/.; Rob. BR.^ II. p. 204 note). Here again the latter is
112 I CHRONICLES
probably the one referred to in the text. This passage as a whole
points to some interesting traditions respecting the origin of the
families of southern Judah. In the "daughter of Pharaoh" we
may see some intermixture of an Egyptian element in the families.
— 19. Another entirely obscure genealogical fragment. — Hodiah]
the name of several post-exilic Levites, Ne. 8^ 9^ 10" <"" 14' 3. —
Naham f]. — Keilah] place of Judah frequently mentioned, Jos.
15^*, Ne. 3 ' ' (especially in connection with David i S. 2;^^ ^■),
identiiied in mod. Kila east of Eleuthcropolis and north-west of
Hebron. — Garmite f]. — Before Eshiemoa the word father has
probably fallen out. — Ma acathite f ]. There may be some con-
nection between this person or family and Maacah, the concubine
of Caleb mentioned in 2^^ — 20. And the sons of Shimon | Amnon
and Rinnah f Ben-hanan and Tilon f and the sons of Jish i
Zoheth ■\ and the son of Zoheth . . .]. This verse is entirely
obscure. The name of the son of Zoheth has fallen from the text
and the relationship between Rinnah and Benhanan (Rinnah son
of Hanan) is not clear. Probably a connective should be placed
between them. — Amnon] elsewhere name of David's eldest son
slain by Absalom, 3' 2 S. 3^ 13' «■. — Jish'i]. Cf. 2".
16. SN-jtrNi] (6 IcrepaTjX = SxTy'.s. This Ki. adopts with the remark
that possibly even before the time of the Massorites the name Israel
was altered where employed for individuals in order to preserve it
in the original form for the chosen people only. ^^ Affepij Kal
Iwaxei/J.. — 17. pi] Heb. MSB. (see Gin.), (5, B ''J^i, so Kau., Ki.,
adopted. — 17b. The transposition given above requires n^n after inm.
see BDB. under mn. (B Kal iy4vvr](r€y''l^9€p,hence'K.\.a^'\rD pn T'^in nnM.
— 19. Dnj] 05 + Kal Aava (or AaXetXa) iraT7}p KeetXd, Kal 'Eui/xeiuv
(Se/xeyuv) iraTjjp 'Iwyitdj', Kal vioi 'Narip.. 2e(a;)^e(w;' probably represents
|vcu' or pniC', thus establishing a connection with v. "". Natjp. is
doubtless a corruption from Nax^M = onj, hence the phrase, if orig-
inal, fell out by homoeoteleuton. Ki. BH. restores as follows:
Dnj 1J31 ]■c^^)^< >3S (iDpynan nS'';;|-i "i2N nfS)-'Si(i). The double rela-
tionship of the father of Keilah, however, introduces a new difficulty.
— 20. jiSini] Qr. and ^A pL„pi.
21-23. Sons of Shelah. — A brief notice of families of
reputed descent from Shelah, whose stock seems to have
almost entirely disappeared. Cf for the only other descendants
IV. 1-^3.] GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH II3
recorded 9^ Ne. 11". — The sons of Shelah son of Judah were *Er
father of Lecah f and Ladah f father of Maresha and families
of the linen workers of Beth-ashbea f and Jokim | and men of
Chozeha f and Jo'ash and Saraph f who ruled in Mo'ab and
returned to Bethlehem'^]. '£r elsewhere is the brother of Shelah,
who died untimely (cf 2^). Since Maresha is the well-known
town of the Shephelah and Lecah not unlikely is the same as
Lachish (Meyer, Entst. p. 164) and Chozcba is probably
identical with Chezib (Gn. 38) = Achzib Jos. 15^^ Mi. i'< ap-
parently also in the Shephelah, Beth-ashbea , otherwise unknown,
is to be sought in the same region. In the place of returned to
Bethlehem, AV., RV. have following iU Jashubilehem, a proper
name parallel with Saraph, but the rendering given (Ki.) having
the support of (^, U, is undoubtedly correct. — Now the records are
old] i.e., those of these families of Shelah. — These are the potters
and the inhabitants of Neta'im f and Gederah]. Netaim is other-
wise unknown. Gederah is mentioned in Jos. 1535. RVm. trans-
lates them rendering, those that dwelt among plantations and
hedges. — The clause. They dwelt there in the king's service] is an
evident look backward. — These obscure vv. '' -" probably preserve
the family traditions and relationships of certain weavers and
potters of the post-exilic times. The reference to Moab and a
return points to some story similar to that of Ruth. A connection
between Joash and Saraph, especially from their ruling in Moab,
and the post -exilic clan Pahath-moab "Governor of Moab," Ezr.
26 8< io3o Ne. 3" 7" io'6 <!<>, has been seen (cf. however, Pahath-
moab, DB.). Bn. holds v." entirely unintelligible.
A very readable exposition of these obscure verses in the Hght of the
discovery of jar handles in S. Pal. inscribed with names similar or
identical to those here given is presented in the Pal. Exploration
Fund Quarterly Statement 1905, by R. A. Stewart Macalister, under
the title, The Craftsmen' s Guild of the Tribe of Judah, pp. 243 ff., 328 ff.
21. In 12VH a corruption of hy2vn has been found, see EBi. Names
§ 42. — 22. anS >3C*;i] Be., adopted by Ki., on'? n''? •i3B';i. (&^ kolI
diri(TTp€\l/ev aiirov ajedtipelv adovKieiv. H renders the entire verse after
the style of an old midrash: Et qui stare fecit Solem virique Mendacii,
et Securus et Incendens qui principes fuerunt in Moab, et qui reversi
sunt in Lahem.
8
114 I CHRONICLES
24-43. Genealogy, geography, and history of Simeon.
The notices of Simeon naturally follow those of Judah owing to
the close connection between the tribes, cj. Ju. i'. The lot of
Simeon was south of Judah, and his cities, Jos. 19'-', were within
Judah's limits and in Jos. 1526-32. 42 included in the lists of that tribe.
The account falls into four parts: vv. ^^-s' his sons and the geneal-
ogy of Shimei; vv. 28-33 their dwelling-nlaces; vv. 34-38 their princes;
w. =9-" historical notices. Of thes*^, vv. 24- 28-33 are derived from
canonical sources {y. i.). The genealogy of Shimei, the list of
princes, and the historical incidents at the close are of unknown
origin. The last were introduced by the Chronicler simply to
show additional dwelling-places.
24-27. The sons of Simeon and the genealogy of Shimei.
— 24. These names appear in Gn. 46'" Ex. 6" Nu. 26'2-i^ For
variations see textual note. Nothing is known of the clans which
they represent. — 25 f . A line of descent from Sha'ul, whose mother
was a Canaanitess, Gn. 46'° Ex. 6'^ i.e., the clan contained Canaan-
itish elements. — Mibsam] and Mishtna] are names also of de-
scendants of Ishmael i'" Gn. 25", suggesting thus a commingling
of the Simeonites with Arabians. — Hamu'el *] interesting as one
of the few OT. names compounded with DPI "father-in-law," i.e.,
kinsman. Hamuel = "a kinsman is God" or "kinsman of God."
M wrongly Hammuel = "heat, wrath, of" or "is God." —
Zaccur'\ is a frequent post-exilic name. — 27. Nothing further is
known of this Shimei who surpassed his brethren in the number
of his household or clan.
28-33. The dwelling places of Simeon. — This passage is a
transcription with slight changes (v. i.) of Jos. iq^-^. — 28. Be'er-
sheba] the well-known outpost of southern Judah present ruin
Bir es Seba (SWP. III. p. ^g4).— M 61 adah] Ne. ii«, perhaps the
Malath of Jos. (Ant. XVIII. 6. 2) identified by Robinson (BR.^ II.'
p. 201) with Tell el Milh, east of Be'ersheba'. This is questioned
by Buhl {GAP. p. 183) and Conder {SWP. III. pp. 403, 415) —
Hazar-sJw al] 29 Bilhah] or Bilah (see text, note), 'Ezem] and
Tolad] have not been identified, likewise 30 Bethu'el] equivalent
to Beth'el i S. 30" unless Beit Aula west of Hulul {SWP. III. p.
302). — Hormah] according to JE in Nu. 213 received its name "de-
IV. 24-43.] GENEALOGY OF SIMEON II5
struction" from defeat of the Canaanites before the entrance of
Israel into the land of Canaan. According to Ju. i^"" its original
name was Zephath and the change took place through its destruc-
tion by Judah and Simeon. Arguing from the name Zephath it has
been located at Sebaita (Buhl, GAP. p. 184). This is doubtful (see
Moore on Ju. i"). The city belonged to Judah, i S. 30'°, and is
frequently mentioned Nu. 14" Dt. i^« Jos. 12'' is*" 19^ — Ziklag]
the city given to David for a residence by Achish King of Gath,
I S. 275, perhaps Asluj a heap of ruins south of Beersheba (Rob.
BR.' II. p. 201), but more generally identified after Conder {SWP.
III. p. 288) with Zuhelike south-east of Gaza (so Buhl, GAP. p.
185). It was a post -exilic residence, Ne. ii^*. — 31. Beth-7narka-
botli] house of chariots, not identified. — Hazar-susim] enclosure of
horses, identified in the ruin Susim ten miles south of Gaza (DB.).
— Beih-biri] probably corruption of Beth-lebaoth ]os. 19^ A
possible reminiscence of the Lebaiyoth mentioned in the Tell el
Amama tablets; not identified. — Shaaraim] Sharuhen Jos. i9«.
This latter preserves the true and ancient name of the place, since
it appears in the list of the towns conquered by Thotmes III.
(Muller, Asien iind Eitropa, pp. 158, 161). The town seems to
have early lost its importance or disappeared, and the name may
have been corrupted into Sha araim. It has been identified in
the ruin Tell esh Sheriah, twelve miles north-west of Beersheba
{SWP. III. p. 262). — These were their cities until David reigned]
a parenthetical clause introduced by the Chronicler, either a refer-
ence to David's census (Ba.) or more probably implying that from
the time of David onward these cities no longer belonged to Simeon
(Be., Oe.). This was clearly the case with Ziklag, assigned by
Achish King of Gath to David and afterward transferred to Judah.
Some of them are given also in the list of the to\Mis of Judah
in Jos. 15=^-32, cf. also i S. 30"'. Moladah, Hazar-shual, Beersheba,
and Ziklag appear in Ne. 1126-28 as residences of post -exilic Juda-
ites. — 32. And their villages] belongs with the cities enumerated in
w. 28-31^ and is not a designation of those following. — 'Etam] is a
textual corruption or substitutibn for 'Ether, cf. Jos. 15** 19^ i S.
30" (where iJJ Ethak), not yet clearly located, although placed at
the ruin 'Aitun near Eleutheropolis {SWP. III. p. 261). — 'Ain-
Il6 I CHRONICLES
rimmon] Jos. 15" 19' Ne. 11" Zc. i4>°, a proposed identification is
Kh. Umm er Rtimanim north-east of Beersheba {SWP. III. p.
261, Buhl, GAP. p. 183). — Token f ] not yet identified. — 'Ashan]
6** »" Jos. 15^' 19' 21 '« (SBOT.) I S. 30'°, a priestly city not yet
identified. — Four *]. 'Ain-rimmon was wrongly read as two places,
hence ^ through corruption h3,s Jive. — 33. Baal] a curtailment of
Ba'alalh-be'er ra'ntafh-negeb. "Mistress of the well, the high place
of the South" Jos. 19^, clearly some old place of worship whose
locahty is unknown. — And they had a genealogical enrollment] i.e.,
the members of the tribe of Simeon inhabiting these places had
records showing their proper tribal descent and hence held a true
place in Israel. This observation is the Chronicler's substitute
or paraphrase of the phrase according to their families Jos.
I9«.
34-43. Princes and conquests of Simeon. — A paragraph
slightly annotated taken from some old source (Ki.). It contains
a list of names \'v. ^*-^', an explanation of the persons mentioned
V. 3«, their conquest or raid in the direction of Philistia w. "-^' and
in the direction of Edom vv. *--''^. — 34-37. The descent of three of
these Simeonites is given: Joshah one generation, Jehu three, and
Ziza five, but their connection with families of Simeon is not given,
unless, in the case of Ziza (v. "), instead of Shemaiah (r;''^!:^'^') we
read Shimei ("^^l^ty) cf. w. " ' . Judging these names as a whole,
they are of a late formation (Gray, HPN. p. 236). — 38. These
enumerated by name, etc.]. This explanatory statement probably
came from the Clironicler (Ki. SBOT.). — 39. And they came to
the entrance of Gerar,^ etc.]. iH has Gedor cf. \.\ but a slight
emendation gives Gerar (d, Ki., Graf, Buhl, die Ed. p. 41), which,
considering the locahty of Simeon, is probably the true reading.
The expedition then was toward Philistia. — 40. For t!ie inhabitants
there formerly ivere of the children * of Ham] a clause, perhaps
editorial (Ki. SBOT.), explaining the security felt by the inhabit-
ants or the liberty felt by the Simeonites in seizing their territory.
The Hamites represent either Eg}'ptians, Ethiopians, or more
probably Canaanites. Cf. the similar quiet and peace of the
inhabitants of Laish Ju. 18". — 41. And came these who were writ-
ten by name in the days of Hezekiah king of Jiidah]. Whether
IV. 24-43.] GENEALOGY OF SIMEON II7
the record (Be.) or the raid (Ke., Zoe., RV.) of these Simeonites
was made in the days of Hezekiah is uncertain from the Hebrew
text; probably the latter and the written record may only refer
to their mention above vv. ^^-". — And they smote their tents and the
Meunim who were found there]. The Meunim are usually con-
nected with the Edomitic city Ma' an south of the Dead Sea,
twenty-five miles west of Petra (Be., Ke., Oe., Zoe., Bn.) (this is
doubtful. Buhl, die Ed. p. 41), or with the Arabian Mineans (Gl.
Skiz. p. 450, Yemen, Ency. Brit.^, Winckler, KAT.^ p. 143).
The (^ /xivatov; favours this, cf. also 2 Ch. 26^ — And they ex-
terminated them]. There is no reference here to a religious
motive in the use of the word D"in to destroy (BDB. cf. 2 Ch. 20"
32'^ 2 K. 19" Is. 37")- — Unto this day]. Cf. v. ", i.e., unto the
time of the composition of the Chronicler's source. — 42. And of
them of the sons of Simeon five hundred men went to Mt. Seir].
The relation of these Simeonites to those previously mentioned is
entirely uncertain. The words from the sons of Simeon have been
held to draw a distinction between these five hundred and the
Simeonites previously mentioned (Graf, Der Stamm Simeon, p. 30),
and contrariwise to identify them (Be.). — 43. The remnant of the
Amalckites] i.e., those who had survived the attacks of Saul and
David (i S. 14^^ 15' 2 S. 8'=) and other foes. These conquests of
Simeon whereby the tribe gained new possessions remind one of
the similar expedition of Dan (Ju. 17, 18), and we are inclined to
receive the record as genuinely historical {cf. Graf, Der Stamni
Simeon, p. 30 ff.). This historicity is doubted by Stade (Gesch.
I. p. 155) and Wellhausen {Prol. pp. 212 /.). The late origin
of the names in y\.^^-^^ (v. s.) may be said also to point in the
same direction. The motive, however, for the fabrication of such
a story is not readily apparent. Some of the older writers saw in
this conquest of Mt. Seir the establishment of an Israelitish king-
dom there which served to explain the oracle concerning Dumah
Is. 21" '• (Mov. p. 136) and (by Hitzig) the kingdom of Massa
(?) Prov. 30' 31' {cf. Nowack, Prov. p. xix.). For a full discussion
of the movements of the tribe of Simeon and also further views
on this passage, which is accepted as recording history, cf. art.
by H. W. Hogg, EBi. IV. coll. 4527 /•
Il8 I CHRONICLES
24. This list of sons of Simeon appears also in Gn. 46"' Ex. 6" Na
2612-13. The variations are as follows: Sniej, Gn. and Ex. ^ttm\
0 has in all cases initial \ otherwise the Vrss. support ^ in the several
passages. Epigraphically ' is a more probable corruption from i than
the converse. Either form is etymologically obscure (Gray, HPN.
p. 307). Following ps'' Gn. and Ex. have ins, and & has here joil.
an^ ^B 'lapdv is in the parallels r^, preferred by Ki. and Bn. (but
05^ 'lapelv is probably influenced by the preceding la/xew, original ^
being that of '^'lapet/S; § ^^>'>^l is doubtless corrected from the parallels
as in many other places, hence is worthless as evidence), mr, Gn. and
Nu. ins. — 27. vz'] (&^^ rpeis. — 28-31. Jos. ig^-^ iNa onSma DnS in^i
noi j'^psi n:;-ini Sinai i':'i.-'"'xi dx;'i n'^31 S'lir isni mSini I'^m jatt'
onnsni r\•^•yy u'Sii' any }nn:;'i nisa*? noi noiD -\xni naannn. The
changes are the omission of 373a' and the insertion of 3 before the names
except Syia* nsni m'^12, as the use of ^y■y^<^ required, and t^:^''^^ for nSa* Snips
for Si.-i2> i'?in for n^i.-'?N> d^did for hdid, i^na iria for rnxaS nu,
and anys' for ]nnc The insertion of the clause Tin iSd iy onnj? nSx
has separated onnsn from the previously enumerated cities so that it
is in apposition with the cities of vJ-, thus all the Vrss. and Kau. — 32.
|ici yj is one place and we should read yaix instead of ''i'::n after
Jos. 19^, where pn has fallen from the text (Bennett, SBOT.). In
Jos. D3>j; does not appear. Probably it is a corruption of ir", Jos. 19'
15" I S. 30^1' (where ^ has T^;). — 35. NnM] (^^ + s mss. k^I oCros read-
ing Nini. — 37. rr;"::"'] Ki. SBOT. corrects to ^';r:v, to agree with v. k,
so also Stade, ZAW. V. p. 167. (^^ Zufxedv = pysr, cf. v.^*.—AO.
on' nam I'isn] tlie land is -wide of (on) both hands, cf. Ju. iS"^ Is. 22"
(BDB. -\'> 3(f).— r-] <S + rQv vlSiv = •'ja. "M + stirpe.—^l.
aT>'cn] Qr. D^JV?lI-
V. 1-26. The east-Jordanic Tribes.
The records of Reuben, Gad, and the eastern half-tribe of Manasseh
are arranged in general on the same plan as that of Simeon. There is ( i ) a
genealogical introduction giving the sons of the progenitor of the tribe
and any immediate descendants (omitted for Gad and eastern Manas-
seh), (2) an account of the territory occupied by each tribe, (3) a list
of princes or chiefs, and (4) historical incidents connected with new
dwelling-places. (2) and (3) are transposed for Reuben and Gad. It is
difficult to see how this order could have been the result of various
interpolations. We have rather a piece of work which has come down
to us in essentially the same form in which it left the Chronicler's hand.
1-10. Reuben. — The tribe of Reuben early became insignifi-
cant, losing its territory through the encroachments of Moab and
being probably absorbed in Gad. Like the account of Simeon,
V. 1-10.] GENEALOGY OF REUBEN II9
that of Reuben also falls into four paragraphs: w. '-^ a list of
Reuben's sons with remarks on the birthright; w. <-« the genealogy
of Beerah, a Reubenite prince carried away captive by Tiglath-
pileser; w. '-' the genealogy and dwelling-place of Beerah's
brethren; v.'" a notice of a war with the Hagrites. The Chron-
icler gives the sons of Reuben as they are found in Gn. 46= Nu.
26* '•. The source of the genealogy of Beerah is unknown.
Vv. ">• « may have been composed by the Chronicler from Jos.
i3'« and Nu. 32'- '^ The incident in v.'" is introduced to show
how the Reubenites came to possess new dwelling-places east
of Gilead.
1-3. And the sons of Reuben the first born of Israel]. These
words are separated from their predicate by the following paren-
thetical statements vvJ^^-\ and hence are repeated again in v.'.
— For he was the first born hit since he defiled the couch of his father
the birthright was given to Joseph son of Israel]. Reuben's de-
filement of his father's couch and his subsequent loss of his
birthright are derived from Gn. 35" 49% and the passing of the
birthright to Joseph from Gn. 48\ The adoption by Jacob of
Ephraim and Manasseh was equivalent to giving Joseph a double
portion or the inheritance of a first-born Dt. 21 '^-i'. — But he is
not enrolled in the genealogy according to the birthright]. This
refers to Joseph — in the tribal registers Reuben held the first place.
Cf. Gn. 468 ff- Ex. 6'< «• Nu. 26^ »•. — For Judah was mighty
among his brethren and a prince was from him]. In reality,
however, the pre-eminence of the first-born seemed to belong to
Judah, of w^hom was the house of David. — 4-6. The sons of
Jo'el]. The connection of Joel with Reuben strangely enough is
not given. Ki. after ^, A, substitutes Carmi (v. ^), but the oc-
currence of Joel in v. » is against this. The sons of Joel are the
persons following. Their names are not inconsistent with the
implied date : Ba al as a proper name could only be early (see
Gray, HPN. p. 237). That a remnant of the tribe of Reuben
should have suffered the captivity of their Sheikh during the As-
syrian invasion (2 K. 15") is historically not improbable. No
record of this is mentioned elsewhere. — 7-9. And his brethren] i.e.,
the brethren of Be'erah, and hence apparently his contemporaries
I20 I CHRONICLES
of the Assyrian period (Be., Bn.) and not of the time of Saul (v. '»)
(Ke., Zoe., Gray, HPN. pp. 237 /.). This latter assumption,
however, is justified from the territory assigned to the Reubenites.
They in all probability had been dispossessed entirely from the land
of Moab by the time of Tiglath-pileser (b. c. 745-728).— 5e/a']
represents a wide-spread clan whose descent, like that of Be'erah, is
also from Jo'el, but by a different and shorter Wne.—Shema] is
not unlikely Shimei or Shemaiah (v. *).—'Aroer] well-known
city on the north bank of the Amon Dt. 2'« 3" 4'' Jos. 12= 13',
mentioned as southern boundary of Reuben Jos. 17,'K—Ncbo]
east of Jericho, Nu. 32'- '' ^y' Is. 15^ Je. 48'- ", the name also of a
mountain Dt. 32*9 34'. — Baal-meon] probably a gloss, since it is
a town lying between Nebo and 'Aro'er, mentioned in Nu. 32^ '»
Jos. 13" Je. 48" Ez. 25^ or else we have an example of the Chron-
icler's lack of geographical knowledge. Both Nebo and Baal-
meon are mentioned on the Moabite Stone. — Entrance of the
ivilderness] i.e., the eastern boundary of their territory was the
wilderness which extends east of Moab and Gilead to the Eu-
phrates.—/w Gile'ad]. Gilead while usually designating territory
north of Moab extending from Heshbon to the Yarmuk, is also
applied to the country as far south as the Amon (Dr. Dt. 3«-'0-
—10. An independent notice of the activity of the Reubenites.—
Hagrites]. In the Assyrian inscriptions the Hagrites [Hagarami]
are mentioned along with the Nabateans [Nabatu] among the
conquests of Sennacherib and located in north-eastern Arabia
(COT. II. pp. 31 /.). In the same locality they are placed by
Strabo and Pliny. Later in the Syriac, the name was used as a
general designation of the Arabians, and at the time of the Chron-
icler either this had taken place or a portion of them had migrated
westward and were pressing on the eastern frontier of Palestine
(Gl. Skiz. I if. 407/.). Their proximity to Palestine is clearly indi-
cated in Ps. 83' («). A connection between Hagar the mother of
Ishmael and the Hagrites is most probable, although it has been
questioned (Dill. Gn. 25'^). That fighting was carried on with
Arabian tribes in the days of Saul is most likely and a reminiscence
of this may be here found. The lack of orderly connection between
the sons of Reuben and the notices following, and the lack of such
V. 11-17.] GENEALOGY OF GAD 121
connection between the notices also, suggest to some that we have
here not an original composition of the Chronicler but a grouping
of fragmentary traditions respecting the tribe of Reuben.
1. '';;is''] pi. of extension Ges. § 124a, Koe. iii. § 26oh; so used
elsewhere Ps. 63" 132' Jb. 17" except Gn. 49^ M, but l| allows pi. and
parallelism suggests it; Ball, SBOT. so emends. — im^j] <& euXoylav
i.e. iroij, also v.- 17 evXoyta rod 'Iwcr^i^, but the context indicates that
the birthright and not the blessing is concerned (Bn.). — rninnS nSi]
1 adversative Koe. iii. § 375f. On inf. cf. Ges. § 114. 2. R. 2, Dr. TH. 202
(2), Dav. Syn. § 95 (b). — 2. T'Jj'?!] rare use of S to introduce a new
emphatic subject, cf. BDB. 5 e (e). — 4. Snt •«j3] (6^ IwtjX vlbs ai/rod
is evidently an effort to establish a connection with the preceding verse.
— n''>TS'] (5 + Kal Bavaia seems to have grown out of a dittography of
1J3.— 5. Sy3] ^B it^^X^ so also (S"^ + BaXa (== BaaX).— 6. ip«i'?s njS.n]
an incorrect way of spelling iDs';'3 nSjn 2 K. 15^' le'", npl^'p nSjn 2 K.
17'^, arising probably from a natural mispronunciation repeated in v. ^
and 2 Ch. 28-". — 9. maia NnS ny]. This inf. phrase is found elsewhere
with the proper name Hamath, cf. Am 6" Ju. 3^ Jos. 13^, etc., except Ez.
47'5, where Cornill reads Hamath. — ms "^^^J^i] instead of the more usual
rno in: Dr. TH. 190. — 10. an'SnN3 12tyi] 05 KaToiKovvres iv crKijvais =
D'''?nN3 c^;u'' adopted by Bn. (who reads 'X ''3U'''), because it gives better
sense than % — ^■;] (S twj = i;?.
11-17. Gad. — The sons of Gad are introduced by the state-
ment that they lived "over against" the Reubenites (v. i'). This
departure from the usual introductory formula, the sons of, is likely
responsible for the omission of Gad's sons as given in Gn. 46'^
Nu. 26 '5-''. The enumeration of the chiefs of Gad with their
brethren (vv. i^-is)^ and the notice concerning their territory and
date (vv. '«"), are followed by the account of a war which resulted
in the extension of their territory (vv. 's-^^). This time the three
east-Jordanic tribes combined in a raid upon the neighbouring
Bedouins. Very likely this is an expansion, of a midrashic nature,
of the same incident recorded in v. •» (so Bn.), but the Chronicler
found them diflferent enough to use both. — 11. The omission of
the lists of sons of Gad, as given in Gn. 46'« Nu. 26"-", is notice-
able.— Bashan] here and in vv. >2- '« " the dwelling-place of Gad
with Salecah, mod. Salkhad, as the north-east limit. This use of
Bashan for Gad's territory is peculiar (Bn. regards the word here as
122 I CHRONICLES
a gloss; Ba. in v. '« emends to Jabesh). Bashan elsewhere is the
name of the country north of the Yarmuk and according to Dt. 3'*
Nu. 32" Jos. 13" the territory of Gad was in Gilead south of
Bashan. Not unlikely the Chronicler, having located Reuben in
Gilead, was misled to place Gad in Bashan. — 12. Jo^el the first and
Shapham f the second and J a nai f and Shaphat]. Jo'el perhaps
the same as the Reubenite Joel of vv. " «, a family or clan whose
members might be reckoned as belonging to either or both of the
tribes. — 13. Of their fathers' houses]. The term father^s house is
used (i) of an entire tribe, since this is named after a common
father Nu. 17'' "' Jos. 22"; (2) generally, of the division next after
the tribe, the clan, Nu. 3^*; (3) of the division after the clan, the
family Ex. 12' i Ch. 7'- ^ Cf Dill. Ex. &\—Micha'el] ^83^::
"Who is like God." A name only occurring in the post-exilic
Hterature 6" ("' 7^ 8'« 122" 271^ 2 Ch. 21^ Ezr. 8».—Meshullam]
C^t^D " Kept safe," i.e., by God, also another name especially fre-
quent in the post-exilic lists 3'' 8" 9^- '■ » '• 2 Ch. 34'= Ezr. S'*
io'= " Ne. y- «• =") 6'8 8* iqs- t^> =' <"" ii'- " 12"- '«• "• 33. — Shcba']
y2w perhaps an abbreviation for Elisheha '^2''C!^h'S^ "God
swears "(?) EBi. II. col. 3291. — And Jorai-\ and Jacan-\ and
Zia f and 'Eber]. These names with those of v. '- correspond well
to ancient clan names. Apparently eleven clans of Gad are enu-
merated, (g^ while mentioning only seven names in v. '= has the
numeral eight instead of seven. This suggests that in v. " originally
stood eight names, giving the tribal number of twelve clans. The
seven or original eight are mentioned separately because their de-
scent is traced in vv. '< '• (v. i.) from Guni ("'J'!)!), which may be a
corruption of Shuni ("'iVw') a son of Gad (Gn. 46'« Nu. 26'=-"), or
the converse, since Guni is a clan name of Naphtali. — 14-15.
These are the sons of AM hail] i.e., those persons or families men-
tioned in V. '^ Abihail elsewhere name of a Levite Nu. 3'*, and
the father of Esther (Est. 2'" 9^3). — The son of Hurl f tJie son of
Jaroah f the son of Gile ad the son ofMicha'el the son of Jeshishai f
the S071 of Jahdo f the son of Buz . . . the son of Abdi'el the son
of Guni]. There is a break in the pedigree at Buz according
to M (so Bn., Ki., Kau.), but Ahi (TIS) appears as a fragment
and it is better after (^^^ to make the line of descent con-
V. 18-24.] A WAR OF THE EASTERN TRIBES 1 23
tinuous. On Gimi see v. ".—16. In Gilead] since Gad's terri-
tory elsewhere is placed in Gilead (Nu. 32'- =«• ^' Dt. 3'' Jos. 22'
12=5). — Jn Bashan] v. s. v. ". — Pasture lands] only used here of
lands in a district and not with a city, unless we should so read the
following (r/. 6'° ^''^). —Sharon] (jTl'yT) not mentioned elsewhere
as a district east of the Jordan. Better after (|^ read Sirion
jV-itJ^ (Ki., Bn.), which would bring the territory of Gad as far
north as Hermon and explain their dwelling in Bashan; per-
haps I'll'^' is a corruption of mt^D (Dt. 3'", see Driver, Com.
4" Jos. 13'- ''• =')> ^^^^ ^'^^^^ land, between the Amon and Heshbon
and here used for the southern territory of Gad (Be., Zoe.), we then
read in all the upland pastures. — With their exits] i.e., on the inter-
pretation just given of Sharon, where the pasture lands sink into
the Ghor of the Jordan. If Sirion is read, substitute "IJ? to for h"^
with (after (|, Ki., Bn.), to their limits. — 17. All of them] i.e., the
families of the Gadites mentioned in vv. "-'^ — In the days of
JotJiam king of Judah and in the days of Jerobo am king of Israel].
These two kings, since Jotham may have acted as regent for his
father Uzziah, were near enough together to have been regarded
as contemporaries. The terminus ad quern of the history of these
trans- Jordanic tribes, according to the Chronicler, is their captivity
through Tiglath-pileser during the period immediately following
the reigns of these kings, and it is not impossible that his gene-
alogies may be based upon some records made of families or locali-
ties at that time.
18-22. Conflict of Reuben, Gad, and the Half-tribe of
Manasseh with adjoining Arabian tribes. — This account fol-
lows the genealogy and location of Gad, perhaps to keep a propor-
tion in closing the section on each tribe with a notice of a war, cf.
V. •" vv. "-'% or since vv. " '• concerning the half-tribe of Manasseh
end with the fall of the tribe, the narrative of a success in which
they shared is placed more fitly earlier. — 18. On the prowess of
the men of Gad and Manasseh cf. 12^- 2'. On the number 44,760
cf. Jos. 4'^ where 40,000 from the eastern tribes cross the Jordan
with Joshua. In Nu. i^'- ^^- '^ Reuben has 46,500 men of war,
Gad 45,600, and all Manasseh 32,000. In Nu. 26^- "• ^' Reuben
has 43,730, Gad 40,500, and all Manasseh 52,700. — 19. Hagrites]
124
I CHRONICLES
see V. '°. — Jettir and Naphish and Nodah f] Arab tribes. The
names of the first two are among the sons of Ishmael Gn. 25'*
I Ch. I". Jetur gave the name to the district Iturea, whose inhabi-
tants were celebrated in the Roman times for their prowess in
arms (GAS. HGHL. p. 544). Nothing further is knowTi of the
other two. — 20. Andtheywere helped against them] i.e., by God
(for a similar use of the Niph. of -|TJ? cf. 2 Ch. 26 '^ Ps. 28').—
And all that were with them] i.e., the three tribes associated aDove
with the Hagrites. The pragmatism of the Chronicler comes out
strongly in this verse. — 21. For a similar enumeration of booty,
cf. Nu. 3i32-^5_ — 22. Unto the captivity] i.e., the Assyrian captivity
under Tiglath-pileser cf. v. "s. The period of this war is not men-
tioned. The account, according to Bn., is an amplification of
that of V. '", and from another hand than that of the Chronicler,
although entirely in his spirit {cf. v. -»). A historical basis for
the narrative lies in the struggles between the children of Israel
east of the Jordan and their Bedouin neighbours.
12. Dflifi] (B^, IS t— . — aDri]<S 6 7pa/ii|uaTei5s.— 13. Dn>m3N n^a'^] Ges.
§ i24r cf. Ex. 6'* Nu. i^- " et al. — layi] nine MSS. 13;1, (g /c. 0^3175. — 14.
nn''] dub. one MS. (Kennic.) yn'' which was probably read by ($, "B. —
1-in'] Baer nn:, (^^'lovpel, a leddai, hence Ki. n_n\ — ns : na] (I* trans-
poses and renders as one proper name Ax'/3oyf, while ^ also has one
proper name Za/Soi'xciM, which is certainly corrupt; ^ omits Titi. — 18.
H2S ^^•i••'] going out to the host, i.e., those able to go to war, cf. 7" 12"- ^
Nu. i3- 20. net al. On construction Ges. § ii6h. — 19. 3iiJi] Gn. 25"
nnnpii. — 20. oncpr] prep. d;j with the suf. of the third pers. pi. + the
relative .u {zj before a guttural), -r is used instead of t-'n in the later
books, Ec, La., Jon., Ct., Ch. (3 times, 25s see note, 27") and once
in Ezr. (8-"), and late Pss. c/. Ges. § 36.— iinvJi] And he stiff ered him-
self to be entreated by them, inf. abs. with change of subj. after a perf.
Ges. § 1 13Z. For a similar use of nny in Niph. tolerativum, cf. Gn. 25^*
2 S. 2i>^ 24'-5 2 Ch. 2,^^^- '5 Ezr. S^' Is. 1922.— 21. D^s-cn] one MS. (Kennic.)
ryv-an, so also (B^'^.
23-24. The half of Manasseh east of the Jordan.— The
genealogy of Manasseh is inserted later when the tribe is con-
sidered as a whole (7'* « ), hence we have only the dwelling-places
and the heads of fathers' houses of the eastern half-tribe of Manas-
seh in w. "-^^ — 23. From Bashan] i.e., from the territory occupied
V. 25-260 CAPTIVITY OF THE EASTERN TRIBES 1 25
by the tribe of Gad, see vv. "• '^ — Ba al-hermon'\ not to be identi-
fied with Baal-gad Jos. 11" 12^ 13^ (which probably should be the
reading in Ju. y, so Budde), since that was located in the Lebanon
valley on the western slope of Hermon. Ba al-hermon of our verse
must be sought in connection with the eastern slope. It may well
then have been mod. Bdneds, which has usually been identified as
Baal-gad (see Moore on Ju. 3'). — Senir'] a peak or part of the
range of Hermon, probably near Damascus between Baalbek and
Homs (see Dr. on Dt. 3' and Haupt Ct. 4^). — And ML Her-
7non'\ a phrase explaining Senir as Mt. Hermon. — They were
very numerous^ The tribe of Manasseh as a whole, judging from
its history, seems to have been one of the most prolific during the
early period of Israel. — And these were the heads of their fathers^
hvuses] i.e., the heads of family groups (cf. Now. Arch. I. pp.
300 /.). — 24. 'Epher *]. If ^ is correct then a name has fallen
from the text. 'Epher and Jishi look like old clan names; the
others, Eli'el, 'Azri'el, Jeremiah (Jirmejah), Hodaviah, and Jah-
di'el, look late (Gray, HPN. p. 238). Nothing further is known
of these famihes or their heads. The names show no connection
with the sons of Manasseh given in Nu. 26^8 «■ Jos. 17- ^- unless
'Epher ("l2y) and Hepher (I2n in Nu. 28==) are identical.
25-26. A summary of the fate of the two and a half tribes.
— 25. And they transgressed] (h]^^'''\). The word '7j;iD is a priestly
word found in P, Ez., and Ch. frequently and almost exclusively.
The subject here is the two and a half tribes. Cf. v. 28. — And they
went a whoring after, etc.] (i"irii< llfl). Cf. Ex. 34'5- 1= Dt. 31'=
Lv. 17' 205 Nu. 15=3 Ju. 2" 8"- =3. The expression denotes
apostasy from Yahweh in the worship of other gods. This
figure with a similar force with the use of the noun is frequent in
the prophets (esp. Ho., Ez.). For a discussion of its full meaning
cf. Dr. Dt. 31'^ — 26. And the God of Israel stirred up the
spirit] (mi . . . lyi). Spirit here denotes an unaccountable and
uncontrollable impulse. Cf. for parallel usage 2 Ch. 2i'6 36" Ezr.
I' 5 Je. 51" Hg. i'^ — Ptil] is identical with Tilgath-pilneser {cf. v.').
The error of the Chronicler in mentioning them as two distinct
persons has arisen from his source 2 K. 15'^ "^ where they are thus
mentioned. Pulu was the original name of the Assyrian king who
126 I CHRONICLES
assumed Tiglath-pilescr on his usurpation of the throne. Hence
the confusion of the sacred writers. In Babylonia Tiglath-pileser
continued to be known by his original name Pulu ((/. COT. I. p.
219, DB. Tiglath-pileser). — Halah and Habor {and Ilara and) the
river of Gozan]. These names are derived from 2 K. 17^ 18"
with the exception of liara (SIH), which is out of place (as well
as the conjunction and before and after it) if not meaningless
{v. i.). The Chronicler identifies the fate of the eastern tribes
through the ravages of Tiglath-pileser with that of Israel in gen-
eral after the fall of Samaria. Habor] is the mod. Khabur (ancient
Chaboras), the well-known tributary of the Euphrates rising in
Karajab Dagh (ancient Mons Masius), and emptying, after a
course of some two hundred miles, into the Euphrates south-east
of the mod. town of ed Deir. Gozan] clearly a district through
which the Habor flowed, to be identified with the Gauzanitis of
Ptolemy, and the Gu-za-na {nu) of the Assyrian inscriptions
{COT. I. 267, KAT.^ 269). The meaning and location of Halah
are not so certain. (^ in Kings has "rivers of Gozan" implying
that Halah as well as Habor was a river, but such a one has
not been satisfactorily located. It is probably a province (Assy.
Halahhi) not so very far from Harran {KAT.^ p. 169). — Unto this
day\ These words probably have arisen by a misunderstanding
of the text of 2 K,, which has and cities of the Medes (v. i.).
23. nn "ij3i] (S K. ol ijfxiaeis. — p::-in ini] ^ + k. iv rq. Ai^dvg,
is doubtless a gloss. — 24. 1371] Gin. quotes two Targums to support
the omission of 1. which is wanting also in 05, H, ^, and so Ki. — nmim]
on pronunciation cf. ^-K — 26. mn avn n;j pu inji Nini -\nni n'^n^]
are probably derived from no ''-i;i jiu inj inn^i vhm of 2 K. 178
18", and the deviations seem to have arisen either from careless transcrip-
tion or because the Chronicler quoted from memory (Be.). Nin may
be a reminiscence of the reading no nn, which appears in C5 of 2 K.
I7^ 18", so Be., Ki., Bn. That n-n orn -\y has arisen from na nyi
appears probable from the fact (&^ gives both in 2 K. 17' (not iS"). Klo.
gives this as the original reading. Ke. thought of the Chronicler's
statement resting on another authority.
V. 27-VI. 66 (VI. 1-81). Genealogy and geography of
Levi. — This section contains: (i) the line of high priests from
Aaron to Jehozadak(i.e.,to the exile), introduced by a genealogical
V. 27-41.] THE LINE OF HIGH PRIESTS 1 27
table showing Aaron's relationship to Levi, 5"-" (6'-"); (2) lines
of descent of singers from Levi through his three sons, Gershon,
Kehath, and Merari, 6'->5 (I6.30). (^) the genealogical tables of
the three singers, Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, 6's-« "i-^"; (4)
notices concerning the services of Levites and sons of Aaron, 6^^-^*
(48-49)- (^) a list of the high priests to Ahimaaz (i.e., to the time
of David), 6^^-^^ (so-ssjj (5) the cities assigned to the sons of Aaron,
539-45 (54-60)j (y) the tribal territory in which the cities of the
Levites lay, 6'^-^° (^i-es); (8) the cities of the Kehathites (exclusive
of sons of Aaron), 6^^-^^ (66.70). (g) the cities of the Gershonites,
556-61 (7i-76)j (10) the cities of the Merarites, 6"-66 (77-8i)_ These
records of the tribe of Levi present a number of diflficulties and
their meagreness considering the importance of the tribe of Levi
is striking. They are repeated with more or less fulness, however,
when the writer treats of the classes of the priests and Levites
and singers (23^ s- 24' «• " «• 25' «•).
V. 27-41 (VL 1-15). The sons of Levi and the line of
high priests from Aaron to the captivity.
This line of high priests is in part a doublet with 635-38 (50-53) and is
regarded by Bn., and Ki. SBOT., Kom., as a later addition, since a list
of priests naturally would follow the genealogical introduction in 6' ^•
(16 s.)_ As the matter now stands, this introduction is given in 527-29»
(51 -3a). The list also is carried down beyond David, while the other
material of c. 6 stops with David. Hence it is held to be more natural
that this list should be secondary to the other 635-38 (50-53) than vice versa,
since an interpolation which added nothing would not naturally be
made. On the other hand, there is some strong internal evidence
against the priority of the second list, 635-38 (50-53). Although s"-^'
(61-3) and 6^-* c^-is) do duplicate each other in part, it is not unrea-
sonable to hold that the former passage was intended to introduce priests
and the latter Levites. Moreover, 63* <") describes the duties of all the
priests, the sons of Aaron, and 63^ ff- (54 »•) is concerned with the cities of
all the Aaronides. The list of high priests included between those two
verses seems out of place, and it is unlikely that the Chronicler intro-
duced it there. A scribe who expected a list of the sons of Aaron after
the verse describing their duties — just as a list of Levites precedes the
verse detailing their duties — may then have inserted this partial list of
the high priests from 53° ^- (6* * ), that being the only one available.
Without the second list of the high priests, the arrangement of the
128 I CHRONICLES
material is characteristic of the Chronicler's order, i.e., the genealogy of
the high priests and the genealogy of the Levites; the duties of the
Levites and the duties of the priests; the cities of the priests and the
cities of the Levites.
27 (1). Gershon, Kehath, and Merari]. These three sons of
Levi appear in Gn. 46" Ex. 6" Nu. 3" 26", and represent three
great famihes of Levites which clearly existed at the time of the
composition of P {cf. 6' <'«> 238). — Gershoji] (I'tyii) as in P, else-
where in Ch. Gershom (D1trn:i, Dw'n:), cf. 6' '■ <'«'•> et al.— 28 (2).
And the sons of Kehath, Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel], Cf.
as a source for these names Ex. 6'' Nu. 3" and for their repetition
6' <•«' 23 '^ Hebron's appearance as a descendant of Levi and thus
a Levitical family name shows that a portion of the ecclesiastical
tribe of Levi came from priests who had ministered at the sanctu-
ary of Hebron. What underlies the other names is unknown.
Uzziel is the only one smacking of artificiality or a late formation
(Gray, HPN. p. 210).— 29 (3). Sources for the children of
Amram and AaroTi are Ex. 6=''- " (except Miriam) Nu. 26^' '■.
Cf. for repetition 23 '^ (except Miriam) 24' • ".
30-41 (4-15). The line of high priests. — Eleazar v. =" <*> was,
according to P, Aaron's successor in the high priesthood Nu. 20";
Phinehas Eleazar's son and successor, Jos. 24== Ju. 2028. Abishua,
Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Amariah (vv. 30-33 (s-?)) are en-
tirely unknown, not mentioned elsewhere except below 6"-37 (50-52)
Ezr. 7' -5. Ahitub v. 3« (»> is given as the father of Zadok 2 S. 8"
I Ch. i8'6. If we look for historical accuracy, he is not to be
identified with Ahitub the father of Ahimelech, the father of Abia-
thar I S. 143 22*0^ since the establishment of Zadok as priest in the
place of Abiathar is regarded as the fulfilment of the prophecy of
the disestablishment of the house of Eli (i K. 2" ^^). His ap-
pearance as the father of Zadok in 2 S. 8", our author's source, is
undoubtedly due to a textual corruption (see i Ch. iS'o). Zadok
V. " ("was priest under David with Abiathar 2 S. 8'' 152^ «• and put
by Solomon in the place of Abiathar (see above). Ahimaaz v. '^ ''>
was a son of Zadok, cf. 2 S. 15"- ^e et al. 'Azariah v. '^ <«> is men-
tioned as a son of Zadok i K. 4K The notice of v. ^s do) he it is
that executed, etc., out of place in v. ^^ no)^ belongs to him, the first
VI. 1-38.] GENEALOGIES OF LEVITES I29
mentioned, Azariah (Be., Bn., Ki., Ba., Zoe., Oe.). Of Jehonan,
'Azariah, Aniariah, Ahilub, Zadok, Shallum, and Azariah, vv.
35-4 0 (9-14)^ ^ve have no further record than in the Chronicler's
genealogies, cf. 9" Ezr. y'-^ Ne. 11", except in the case of Ama-
riah, who may be identified with Amariah the high priest during
the reign of Jehoshaphat mentioned in 2 Ch. 19". Hilkiah
V. 39 "3) is apparently the high priest of the reign of Josiah, 2 K.
22^ et al. Seraiah the father of Jehozadak v. "" "^' was high priest
at the fall of Jerusalem, B. c. 586, and was taken captive and put to
death at Riblah (2 K. 25'8-='), while Jehozadak went into captivity
V. *i "^', and appears as the father of Jeshua the high priest of the
return, Ezr, y S' ^o" Ne. 12=6 (Jazadak) Hg. i' Zc. 6". The pur-
pose of this genealogy is to connect Jehozadak with Aaron and
thus legitimise his priesthood. The line of descent including
Aaron from the Exodus to the captivity consists of twenty-three
members and is artificial in structure, since allowing forty years
or a generation for each member, we have 40 x 12 + 40 x 11,
or 920 years. This period fits into the priestly chronology of the
historical books, whereby 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to
the founding of Solomon's Temple (i K. 6'), and 480 years from
thence to the founding of the second Temple (see Chronology of
OT., DB.), and the captivity occurred in the eleventh generation
of this second period. According to this scheme also Azariah the
thirteenth member (v. ^^ oj) ministers in Solomon's Temple.
As an apparent list of high priests from the entrance into
Canaan until the captivity, this genealogy presents some note-
worthy features. Members of the house Eli : Eli, Phineas, Ahitub,
Ahimelech, and Abiathar (i S. 14' 22^°), naturally do not appear,
since this house was set aside for that of Zadok (i K. 2"- ^^), but
the omission of the high priests Jehoiada (2 K. ii^ 2 Ch. 22", etc.)
and Urijah (2 K. 16" "■) and an Azariah in the reign of Uzziah
(2 Ch. 262") between Amariah of Jehosphat's reign and Hilkiah
of Josiah's, is striking {v. s.).
VI. 1-4 (16-19). The sons of Levi.— On w. ' ' "« '«' cf.
^27. 28 (^(y\. 2)_ — Libui ttud Shimei]. Cf. as a source for these names,
Ex. 6'^ Nu. 3 '8, and their repetition 23', and also 23 « «• 2621 where
instead of Libni we have La dan (jny?). Libni without doubt is to
9
130
1 CHRONICLES
be connected with the priestly city Libnah (Jos. 21"). — Mahli and
Mushi]. Cf. as source Ex. 6" Nu. 32° and repetition 232' 24".
Mushi C^UV^) has been connected with Moses, as though the
family derived their name from that of Israel's law-giver (We.
Gesch. pp. 151/.); also with Misri or Musri (EBi.).
5-6 (20-21). A fragment of the pedigree of Asaph. (Be.,
Bn., Ki., but not Zoe.) Cf. w.^^-' "»">. This conclusion is
suggested by the pedigree of Heman, which follows, and seems
warranted when we compare the list of names (A) with those in
Yy_ 24-28 (39-43) (_B).
A
B
Gershom.
Gershom,
Libni.
Jahath.
Jahath.
Shime'i.
Zimmah.
Zimmah.
Jo'ah.
Ethan.
'Iddo.
'Adaiah.
Zerah.
Zerah.
Je'atherai.
Ethni.
The variations between Jo'ah (nSI^) and Ethan (jn'»S), 'Iddo
(ny) and 'Adaiah (H^nj;), Je'atherai (^HS^) and Ethni (""inS),
might easily have arisen in transcription. Shime i may have been
omitted from (A) by oversight, or since Libni is wanting in (B),
Jahath and Shime i may have been transposed and the tradition
may have fluctuated in regard to the descent of Asaph whether
through Libni or Shimei {cf. v.^ (") and 23>'', where Jahath is the
son of Shimei) and B thus have given the latter view.
7-13 (22-28). A pedigree of Heman (Be., Bn., Ki., Ke., Oe.,
Zoe.). — This pedigree which ends in Abijah is broken or irregular
in the present Heb. text: cf. v.'" <"', where without connection
with the foregoing Sha'ul of v. ' «^> we have The sons of Elkanah
'Amasai and Ahimoth, and in v. " <=«' we have Elkanah repeated.
The second should be omitted (after (|, ^) and reading his son
instead of sons of (133 for t^n) the verse should read Elkanah his
son (i.e., the son of Ahimoth), Zophai his son. In v. •' ("' at the
close should be added Satmi'd his son (Ki. after (B^). Also in v. "
Joel should be supplied and the verse read And the sons of Samu^el;
VI. 1-38.]
GENEALOGIES OF LEVITES
131
the first-horn Joel and the second Abijah (n"'3S TwTn h^y^)
(Ki. BH., RV. after (&^, g>, v. '« '"> i S. 8^). Joel was the father
of Heman (v. '» ^^^^), hence this pedigree is that of Heman, and
corresponds to that given in vv. 's''" """-'s). As in the case
above of Asaph, the substantial oneness of these lines of descent
is revealed at once by placing them side by side.
A
B
Kehath.
Kehath.
Amminadab.
Izhar.
Korah.
Korah.
Assir, Elkanah,
Ebiasaph.
Ebiasaph.
Assir.
Assir.
Tahath.
Tahath.
Uriel.
Zephaniah,
'Uzziah,
'Azariah.
Sha'ul.
Jo'el.
Elkanah.
Elkanah.
Amasai.
Amasai.
Ahimoth.
Mahath.
Elkanah.
Elkanah.
Zophai.
Zuph.
Nahath.
Toah.
Eliab.
Eliel.
Jeroham.
Jeroham.
Elkanah.
Elkanah.
Samu'el.
Samu'el.
Jo'el.
Jo'el.
Abiah.
Heman.
The names Kehath, equivalent to Kohath, Izhar, and Korah (B)
are derived from E.x. 6'8 2i_
In respect to the variations: 'Amminadab appears in Ex. 6^3
as the father-in-law of Aaron, and may have been placed for Izhar
in (A) through an o^/ersight ((^^ has Izhar) (v. i.). Assir and
Elkanah are either redundant in (A) through a similar cause or
have fallen out from (B). Uri'el and Zephaniah are difficult to
explain as equivalents. The names ' Uzziah and 'Azariah are inter-
changeable (as in the case of the well-known King of Judah). The
differences between the other corresponding names have probably
arisen through transcription. Cf. the letters in the Hebrew text.
132
I CHRONICLES
This pedigree is clearly artificial. A portion of its construc-
tion comes from i S. i", where Elkanah is mentioned as s. Jeroham,
s. EHhu, s. Tohu, s. Zuph. Zuph is probably a district, and Tohu
(Toah, Nahath) a family (r/. Tahath i Ch. 7"; We. Prol. p. 220).
The story of Samuel shows distinctly that he was not a Levite, for
then he would have belonged to the Lord without the gift of his
mother (i S. i" ' ). He is made a Levite by the Chronicler ac-
cording to the notions of his own times respecting Samuel's service
at the sanctuary. The names of Samuel's sons are derived from
I S. 8».
14. 15 (29. 30). The pedigree of Asaiah the Merarite.— This
pedigree to correspond with those of vv. '-'^ "=-=8) should present a
line of descent of Ethan (w. "-'- (44.47' j^ but a close similarity of
names is here wanting. Still they have been held sufficiently
alike to warrant this inference (Be.). 'Asaiah may be the one
mentioned in 15^ as chief of the sons of Merari. It is noticeable in
this pedigree that both Libni and Shimei here are Merarites, while
above v. = "" they are Gershonites.
1. D'inj] so also v. ^^ 15', nv^nj vv. =■ ^- "■ ^^ elsewhere p'i'-ix ©" in
this c. Te{e)b(Td}v, in 15' TTjpffdfi, (B'^^ in all — cwv, § ^n a, ^, U Gerson
in V. -. Since the source (Ex. 6'6) has Gershon and the Chronicler differ-
entiates Gershom and GershoJi in c. 23, it is likely that |Vi'-\j was original
here also. — 7. airr:>'] v. "^ Ex. 6i«- 21 et al. i^s^, which seems original
here. aij^Dj? may have arisen in consequence of a dittography of the 3
from the following mi, 3 ins' resembling D-irr^y very closely in ancient
writing. — 7. 8. 1J3 i^DNi 1J3 fiD>3Ni Ml njpSs ua i^DS 1J3 nip]. Accord-
ing to Ex. 6« the sons of Korah were tiDNOXi njp'^'si tdn. Either
the compiler had a variant tradition or the text is corrupt. The latter
seems probable. 1 before ^don and 1 before n^DN are out of place in the
text as it stands. (&^ reads 'Apecrel vlbs avrov, 'EXKam Kal ' A^iadap w6s
auToO, 'Aaepel v. a. Since the tendency would be strong to insert
i;t6s avToO after 'E\Kava (cf. (S^ of v. •" k. viol EXkow A/xacra vibs
aiiToO KfxiioO vlbs avrov) this omission is striking. The same tendency
would be potent in the Heb. text. Consequently we conjecture that the
original read m T'Dn, m r|D^3Ni njp'^x tds i:a mp Korah his son, Assir,
Elkanah and Ebiasaph his sons, Assir his son {i.e., the son of Ebiasaph).
These slight changes restore the harmony with v. - and with Ex. 6-',
account for the 1 before tiD>3N and for that before I'Dx {v:2 having
been misread 1 1J3), also explain the omission of in after njpSs in the
Heb. underlying (6". This and the ij3 after the first ton were added by
VI. 1-38.] GENE.\LOGIES OF LEVITES 1 33
some copyist who overlooked Ex. 6=^. — 10. mo^nN] v. -" and 2 Ch. 29'2
nns, adopted by Bn.— 11. njp'-N ijj njpSN] Kt. '^ja, so (S, (H, ^, is to be
preferred to Qr. \jp {v. s.). The second nj|-)'?N, omitted in some iiss.,
(&, S*, should be dropped, so Bn., Ki. {v. s.). — ■'Dix] v. =" Kt. l^x, Qr. Iix.
I S. I' D''Dis = 1DIS (We. et al.) and nix'p. Probably the original
name was lis. — .in:] v. " n^n, i S. 1' inn. Ki. {SBOT., Kom.) adopts
inh as the best authenticated. The other forms could have originated
in scribal errors. — 12. 3n^'?n] v. '» '^t<''^.?<, i S. i' nihiSn. The versions
give no aid. The last two (meaning " My God is God " and " He is my
God") may have been interchanged. '?.s^'?s< appears ten times in the
OT., all in Ch., cf. ^n^'^vS (the brother of David) 2'= i S. le^, and i.t'-n
(Qr. Nin — ) I Ch. 27'8. — ij3 ':'Nic;;> is added by Ki., on the basis of 05"-,
as indispensable. It is not improbable that the compiler, after gathering
what information he could from i S. i', went on to enumerate the sons
of Samuel from i S. 8- without stopping to make a connection so well
known.
16. 17 (31. 32). David's appointment of the singers.— 16
(31). — House of Yahweh] is used here generally both for the tent
where David placed the ark, and the later Temple (cf. g-'). —
After the resting of the ark] i.e., after the bringing up of the ark
from the house of Obed-Edom to Jerusalem (2 S. 6= 1^). — 17 (32).
The tabernacle of the tent of meeting] (lyiD 'PnS i3C'D)- A com-
bination of two terms employed in P for the tabernacle and applied
to the tent erected by David for the ark (cf. 16' ^■). Technically
Mishkan (tabernacle, dwelling-place) denoted the wooden portion
of the tabernacle, while 'Ohel (tent) the curtains or hanging
(Ex. 26' « ' 35>i 3613 '■ 39" 4019 Nu. 3" cf. also Ex. 39^2 402- "= ■%
where the combination given above is used to indicate the wooden
structure). — According to their right] (DD£tyi22 cf. 24" 2 Ch. 30'^).
The reference apparently is to the order or position prescribed
by David for the singers, a subject taken up in detail in c. 25.
According to vv. ^^ (39) 29 un t^g guild of Heman occupied the
central position with that of Asaph on the right and Ethan on the
left. The Chronicler thus held that the musical services later
adopted in the Temple were established by David in connection
with the tent in which he had placed the ark.
16. T'Dyn] appointed, a peculiar force cf. i5'«f- 16'^ 22^ 2 Ch. 8'<
q8 J115 22 jq5. 8 2i2i 24'3 255- n et al. (1. 89). — n; hy] over the service, cf.
BDB. -", 5. h.
134 I CHRONICLES
18-32 (33-47). The three singers Heman, Asaph, and
Ethan, and their lines of descent. — These three singers, who
are assigned to the time of David, represented in reality three choirs
or guilds of the post-exilic period and were quite modern in their
development, for according to Ezr. 2<' Ne. 7^^ the sons of Asaph
and singers were equivalent, and the singers were distinct from
the Levites. (This distinction is held by Sm. p. 26; OTJC? p.
204; Baudissin, Gesch.desA. T. Pnesteri}mms,pp. 142 jf., also DB.
IV. p. 92; Nowack, Heb. Arch. ii. p. iii; on the other hand, Tor-
rey claims that no such distinction can be found in Ezr. and Ne.,
Comp. and Hist. Value of Ezr. and Ne. pp. 22 /.) Gradually,
however, singers were evolved into Levites and the three guilds.
Remains of steps of this evolution and fluctuating traditions appear
in the Levitical genealogies. In Ex. 62' the three sons of Korah are
Assir, Elkanah, and Abiasaph ( = Ebiasaph), i.e., father of Asaph,
and hence we should expect to find Asaph a descendant of Korah,
but according to vv. =^--8 <"-'" he is not. Also we find i\ssir and
Elkanah placed not co-ordinate but following each other {\'\. '-'
(22-24) 22 (37)) (yet 566 lu loco). Different genealogists certainly
worked over these names. The sons of Korah appearing in the
titles of the Pss. (42. 44-49. 84. 85. 87. 88) probably mark a
step in this evolution earlier than the formation of the three
guilds. Korah in i Ch. 2" is associated with Tappuah as a
son of Hebron. This indicates either a place or Judean family
of that name from which came the Levitical Korahites (We. Is.
und Jiid. Gesch. pp. 151 /.).
A noticeable difference of length appears in these genealogies :
thus Heman has twenty links, Asaph fifteen, and Ethan only
twelve.
The relation of the genealogies in 6'-'5 "S") to those of the
singers in 61^-32 (33-47), Xhe latter genealogies are probably depend-
ent upon the former, which originally may have been of Levites not classi-
fied as singers. The inconsistencies which make this statement doubtful
are removed by textual criticism {v. i.). The writer simply appropriated
these genealogies in order to find Levitical pedigrees for the singers.
The genealogy of Heman, 6'8-23 (33-38)^ jg the same as the line of descent
through Kehath, 6'-'3 (22-28)^ Heman being made the son of Joel, the son
of Samuel. Thus he becomes contemporaneous with David, between
VI. 1-38.] GENEALOGIES OF LEVITES 135
whom and Samuel there is but one generation, viz., that of Saul. This
writer errs in making Mahath (= Ahimoth) the son of Amasai, c/. 6'" *"'
where they are brothers, but see also 2 Ch. 29'2. The genealogy of Ger-
shon, 6* '• '2° '•', is not sufficiently long (only eight generations) to bring
the last, Jeatherai, down to the generation of Saul, hence Malchijah,
A'laaseiah,* Michael, Shimea, and Berechiah were added by the writer
of 6-*-=* (39-43)^ thus making it possible to regard Asaph as the contempo-
rary of David. Similarly, the genealogy of Merari, 6'< '■ '■■^ '■', consist-
ing of only eight generations, is too short to reach from Merari to the
singer Ethan, the contemporary of David, hence a number of generations
were added by the writer of Ethan's genealogy, 629-32 (44.47 )_ Moreover,
he seems to have departed from the genealogy of Merari after Shimei,
and to have added eight generations, Bani, Amzi, Hilkiah, Amaziah,
Hashabiah, Malluch, Abdi, and Kishi, before Ethan.
The source of the genealogies of the singers. Of the additional
names inserted before Asaph, Berechiah occurs elsewhere in 32" 9''
15"- « 2 Ch. 2812 Ne. 34. 30 6'8 Zc. i'- ', = Jeberechiah Is. 8^ f; Shimea
(xi'tr) in 6'5 (30) as a Levite (but spelling ''i,'j2V it is very frequent in the
writings of the Chronicler, especially as a Levitical name); Michael
eight times elsewhere in the writings of the Chronicler and in Nu. 13"
(P) Dn. io'3- 21 J 2'; Maaseiah* nineteen times elsewhere in Ch.-Ezr.-
Ne. and in Je. 21' 292'- " 35* 37'; Malchijah twelve times elsewhere in
Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. and Je. 21' 38'- ^ Hence these names are late (except
Shimea) and favourites with the Chronicler. Similarly the additional
names to the genealogy of Ethan occur in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. as follows:
Bani, 13 times (or 15, see BDB.); Amzi, 2; Hilkiah, 5 (besides fre-
quently as the high priest of Josiah's time); Amaziah, 2 (besides fre-
quently as the well-known King of Judah); Hashabiah, 14 (always a
Levitical name); IMalluch, 6 (also always Levitical); Abdi, 3 (the last
three do not occur elswhere); Kishi, as Kushaiah only in 15'', but as
Kish, 5 times. On this ground alone it is conclusive that these gen-
ealogies of the singers were composed by the Chronicler or in his
day. Furthermore, 6'6-i8a oi-asa)^ where the ear-marks of the Chron-
icler are evident (notice Tioyn, 1. 89; omiay hy Dao^i-c^ ncjjii and onoyn,
cf. D--\T:y 2 Ch. 7', DnDi'n Ne. 12"), is a part of this same piece.
Hence it is most probable that the Chronicler himself gave the
singers these pedigrees descending from the three sons of Levi. No
doubt the latter had already claimed Levitical descent. The Chron-
icler may have utilised some current genealogies of the singers to sup-
plement the Levitical tables of 6' f- '^o £f.). The identity of one
name would be sufficient to make the connection, which may ac-
count for the omission of the last four names of the table of Merari
{v. s.). The fact that Ethan is used here and in 15" ^- while elsewhere
we fmd JediUhun (i6<' 25'- »• « 2 Ch. 5'2 29'* 35") is not significant.
136 I CHRONICLES
The Chronicler could have identified the two as well as a later interpo-
lator. The objection has been raised (by Bn.) that elsewhere in Ch.-
Ezr.-Ne. — except 15" ''• which is doubtless dependent on this passage —
Asaph seems to figure as the chief singer (c/. 16'-' Ne. 11") and he is
always mentioned first. But it is by no means certain that the writer
of these genealogies intended to exalt Heman's guild of singers above
the Asaphites. Although Heman is placed first, he is not called the
chief. Asaph's descent is traced from Gershon, the oldest of the sons of
Levi, which may imply that his guild was recognised as the oldest. His
position on the right hand, possibly an indication of the position this
guild occupied in the service at the Temple, was a post of honour,
cf. Gn. 4S'4 Ps. no'.
18. "Tinpn] (g, U, g>, yl nnp. — 19-21. On Sn^'^x. mnj f\--i, pto, see
above ^^. ^i:. According to v. "" •''■vz'} was the father of rnc, v. '" makes
him out the brother of .'ii'i^nx = nns. Possibly v. 2" is dependent on
some text which had 1J3 after pirr^nx = nns {cf. (S^- quoted above on
v\'. '■ ^), or V. 20 is due to the carelessness of the compiler. (5^ of v. '"
may be corrected from this verse. — 22. 1D'3S p I'Dx] v. s. v^^ '■ ^. —
25. n':;';-^] read with some mss., (S", S> n^a-j;-:, so Bn., Ki. — 28. Dirn^]
V. s. v. '. — 29. ■'w",-'] many mss., Kt. (Oriental text), CSS IS '1?'V, 15"
in'cii"), f/. 2 Ch. 29'2 1-iaj? p v'p. — 30. 31. -scn p n^p'i'n p] has fallen
from the text of CS" by homoeoteleuton. (B'' vlos XeXx'oi;* viov A/xaaai
supports iH (Ki. BH. is misleading).
33. 34 (48. 49). A description of the service of the Levites
and the priests. — This description is according to P and the as-
signment there by Moses. — Their brethren the Levites] i.e., all
Levites not singers and not priests. The term Levite is social as
well as tribal. The subordinate ministry of the Levites is here
meant (cf. Nu. 3^ " ). The duties of the priests are summarised
as service at the altar of burnt offering (cf. Ex. 27'-8), at the altar of
incense (cf. Ex. 30'-'), and in whatever functions were connected
with the rooms of the sanctuary (cf. Nu. 4"=) (the term holy of
holies cannot be restricted here to the innermost sanctuary), also
to tnake an atonement for Israel]. The priests made an atonement
through sacrifices for individuals (Lv. 4=° ^i g^^ 10" et al.) and for
the entire people on the day of atonement (Lv. i6'<), and also on
other occasions of stress and fast (2 Ch. zg-"). The term to make
an atonement is used here to indicate the priestly ministry in general.
34. iddSi] inf. cstr. with ivaw, a continuation of Dnvjiic, Ges. §
ii4/>, Dr. TH. 206, Dav. Syn. § 92 R. 4.
VI. 39-45.] DWELLING-PLACES OF PRIESTS 137
35-38 (50-53). The high priests from Aaron to Ahimaaz.
Cf. s'o-^* (6^-8). — Tills genealogy if not the original with the Chron-
icler (v. s.) is repeated here to give data to the time of David.
39-66 (54-81). The dwelling-places of Levi. — This section,
with rearrangement and some slight abridgment, is taken from
Jos. 2I5-". In that passage a general statement of the number and
locahty of the cities of the priests and Levites (Jos. 21^-') precedes
the enumeration of the separate cities of both priests and Levites.
Here on the other hand the separate cities of the priests are first
enumerated (vv. "-^= ''^-"> Jos. 2i'»-") and then is given the
general summary (w. "^-5° *"■"' Jos. 2i5-») and then follows the
enumeration of the separate cities of the Levites (vv. "-'='= (66-si))_
In this order v. ^^ ^^^'' forms no proper introduction to the following
verses. It can only introduce according to its place in Jos.
v^^_ 59 ff. (54 ff.). Hence this, with the preceding verse, is held to
have come from a marginal annotation made by some reader
familiar with the narrative of Jos. and later to have been inserted in
the text (Be., Ki.), or the entire list of Levitical cities (vv. "-66
("-81)) is a later supplement (Bn.), or a copyist through error re-
arranged the original material of the Chronicler. But it is more
likely that the Chronicler himself was guilty of this unskilful
arrangement. Wishing to separate the account of the priestly
cities from that of the Levites, he transposed the verses. That he
should have transcribed and left Jos. 21' (v. s" '^s)) where it did not
harmonise with the text is not strange. He is guilty elsewhere of
similar infelicities (see Intro, p. 19).
39-45 (54r-60). The cities of the priests. — Taken from Jos.
2iio-i9_ — 39, j^yid these {i.e., the following) are their dwelling places
according to their settlements within their boundary] from the
Chronicler, since these words are not in his source. The proper
introduction (Jos. 21 «) is given in v. s" <"> (v. s.). — To the sons of
Aaron, etc.]. With these words commences abruptly the quota-
tion from the book of Joshua. — Of the family of the Kehathites].
Cf. 5" (6'). — The fir st^ lot]. The viord first, supplied from Jos.
21"', is necessary for clearness of meaning. — 40 (55). Hebron]
Kirjath-arba Jos. 20% which, according to Jos. i^'\ was the
more ancient name, mod. El-KhalU, twenty-three miles south
138 I CHRONICLES
and a little west of Jerusalem; one of the oldest and most
notable cities of Palestine, built seven years before Zoan in
Egypt (Nu. 13"); the burial-place of Sarah, Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob (Gn. 23" 25' 35" <"■ 50'^); David's residence when
king over Judah (2 S. 5'); the place of the death of Abner (2
S. 3"), a.nd headquarters of the rebellious Absalom (2 S. 15' ' ).
—And the suburbs]. Cf. 2 Ch. ii'^— 41 (56). This verse
harmonises with the previous verse the gift of Hebron to Caleb
recorded in Jos. 15''. Both verses (this and the preceding) in
the book of Joshua are editorial insertions (Bennett, Jos.
SBOT.). They interrupt the narrative. — 42 (57), Cities]. The
plural is an error. Only Hebron was a city of refuge. Hence
after Jos. 21 '^ read city. The Chronicler has here abridged
(^, ly — Libnah]. A city in the lowland of Judah of some histor-
ical importance {cf. 2 K. 8" 19^ 23^')- Its location has not been
clearly identified.— /a//zV] in the hill country of Judah (Jos. 15^'
21'^ I S. 30" t), raod.' Attir thirteen miles south by west from
^chron.—Eshtemoa]. Cf. 4".— 43 (58). Hilen] Holon Jos.
2i>S in the hill country of Judah mentioned in Jos. 15=' between
Goshen and Gilo; not identified.— 7:>c&/';-] also called Kirjath-
sepher (Jos. 15'= Ju. i" '•), a place of importance in the Negeb
or southern Judah, identified with Dahariyeh, some ten or twelve
miles south-west of Hebron (cf Moore, Ju. pp. 25 /.)•— 44 (59).
'Ashan] written 'Ain Jos. 21"' (v. i.), mentioned among towns of
Judah Jos. i5'2, and of Simeon Jos. 19' f : clearly then in southern
Judah: not idcnt'Aed.—Beth-shemesh] on the borders of Judah
Jos. IS'", but assigned to Dan Jos. 19^', the mod. 'Ain Shenis in
the valley of Sorek south of the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem
and not far from the half-way point (Baed." pp. 14, 126). The
place was probably an ancient Canaanite sanctuary {cf. for his-
torical references i S. 6' «■ i K. 4' 2 K. 14" 2 Ch. 25" 28»«).—
45 (60). Geba] a town frequently mentioned (8^ i S. 13' 2 S. 5"
I K. 15-2 2 K. 238 2 Ch. 16" Ne. ii3> 1229 Is. 10" Zc. 14'"), mod.
Jeba south of the pass of Michmash. It is about four miles
north by east from Jerusalem.— yl/ewe//i] (Almon Jos. 2i'8)
mentioned in the genealogies 8^6 ^42^ identified with mod. Almit,
three and a half miles north-east of Jerusalem, beyond '^wa//io/^,
VI. 46-66.] DWELLING-PLACES OF LEVITES 139
which is distinguished as the home of Jeremiah (Je. i' 11" " 29"
32" " , also mentioned in 2 S. 23" i K. 2^^ Ezr. 2" Ne. 7" 11" Is.
10" -j-), mod. 'Anala three miles north-east of Jerusalem. — Thirteen
cities]. Only eleven are mentioned in the present text of Ch.,
hence probably Jutta found in Jos. 2i'« and Gibeon in Jos. 21"
should be supplied in vv. "' '• ii'. i.).
39b-45 compared with Jos. 2i"'-'3 show the following variations, some
of which appear abridgments of the Chronicler and others seem to have
arisen in the transmission of his text, and should be restored from Joe.
We give as the former: v. ^'t* the omission of 'n>i before ''ja'?, and ''J3D
mS after \-inpn (nns!:':;'? instead of 'D?: in Jos. represents the true text,
since the formula /row the families of the tribes is not used, see SBOT.
on Jos. 2i<); V. " ]'MT\ Nin py;r\ >on jj^is n-iip hn cut down to ]'^2r\ ns
and in^'^ read for "ina; v. ^' irinxa omitted after njo''; v. ■•" pjn omitted
after ]-in}< and nsin after oSpr:. The latter omission appears also in
V. 5=, cf. Jos. 21^^. In vv. " '■ the sums of the cities as given in Jos. 21'^ "
are omitted. Variations through careless transmission appear: v. "*>
)pn-\ omitted after Smjn; v. ■'^ ny instead of n^jJi ni^njc nKi omitted
after p^n and after nn\ which phrase also with no'' and with pj?3J have
fallen out of vv. "<'•; v. " □n\ninD:;'C2 instead of piir-UDi. The ]Z'y
of V. " is the true reading instead of IV of Jos. 21 '6, cf. on Jos. in loco
(&, SBOT., Dill., and also Jos. i5'2 ig?. Probably also with variations
due to copyists should be classed: v. *^ iS^n instead of I'^n, cf Jos. 15^';
V. ■'^ ncVj; instead of p::Sy with Auathoth after instead of before.
46-50 (61-65). A summary of the Levitical cities. — Taken
directly from Jos. 215-9 (^^_ s.). — 46 (61). And the rest of the children
of Kehath had by lot out of the families of the tribe of Ephraim and
out of the tribe of Dan and out of the half tribe of Manasseh ten cit-
ies^\ The present M, is corrupt and meaningless and must be thus
restored according to Jos. 21^ Be. suggested that the confusion
may have arisen from the deliberate omission of the reference to
the tribe of Dan {cf. 7 '2). The sons of Kehath, or the first main
division of the Levites, omitting from their number the priests, had
in the territory of Ephraim and Dan, adjoining Judah,and in West
IManasseh ten cities enumerated in part in w. "■" (^e-jo). — 47 (62).
The sons of Gershom representing the second main division of the
Levites had thirteen cities, enumerated in vv. "-«' (71 -7e)^ in the
territory of Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and the east-Jordanic tribe
of Manasseh. — 48 (63). The sons of IMerari, the third and final
I^o I CHRONICLES
main division of the Levites, had as their possession twelve cities
enumerated in part in vv. «" ("-so.— 49 (64). This verse gives a
summary of the preceding. — These^ cities]. The word these
supphed from Jos. has perhaps fallen from the text. — 50 (65).
By lot] out of place by copyist's error, belongs to the previous
verse. This verse in Jos. begins a new paragraph and is here
entirely out of place introducing the matter of vv. "^^-^^ «*"-«"
(v. s.).
46. nnsrcr] Jos. 21' rnstrcD to be preferred (Bn.), but amnocD?
with HBDD as in vv. "'• is preferred by Ki., and also Bennett, as the true
reading in Jos. 2i^t., 550r.— noa ^sn-i ]-i naaai d^bx nas is to be sup-
phed after nnDtt-cn from Jos. in place of ^sn nan n-'xncD nacn as is
required by the ten cUies.—47 . Dicnj] Jos. 216 piinj, v. s. v. ■.— omnott'c'^]
according to their families, i.e., of Gershonites, Jos. 'ui rnDi;':;^ from
families of the tribe, etc. (but -y. 5.).— Instead of ncjD nam Jos. has 'snci
'C nan and after lii-aa, S-nJ2. — 48. Snu::] is wanting in Jos. 21' (but cf.
(g), — 49. V. s. In Jos. 218 the verse closes with io nin> nix i-.;'}<:)
b-\M2 ncs. — 50. V. s. — P'J3 ^J3 n-jcci] wanting in Jos. (but cf. (&
and Jos. 21-').
51-66 (66-81). The cities of the Levites (in distinction from
the priests).— Taken directly from Jos. 2i'»-'5 with some abridg-
ment, and the text has evidently suffered through transcription.
—51 (66). And families of the sons of Kehath had cities of
their lot,^ etc.] thus correctly Be., Bn., Kau., Ki., after Jos. 21".
— 52 (67). The city* of refuge] since only Shechem was a city
of rtinge.—Shecheyn] a little over thirty miles north of Jerusalem,
figures frequently in the early history of Israel {cf. Gn. 128 2>Z'^
35< Jos. 24>- " Ju. 9 I K. 12). It is the mod. Ndbulus, a city of
24,800 inhabitants (Baed.^ p. 217).— Geser] an ancient Canaan-
itish city not occupied by the Israelites (Jos. i6'» Ju. i" contra
Jos. 10") until conquered by "Pharaoh king of Egypt" and pre-
sented to Solomon i K. 9'« : the mod. Tell Jezer, some twenty
miles west by north from Jerusalem, and the site of recent excava-
tions {cf. R. A. Stewart Macalister, Bible Side Lights from the
Mound of Gezer, Lon. 1906).— 53 (68). Instead of Jokmeam
Jos. (21") has Kibzaim, which, according to Be., Bn., Ki.,
is to be preferred. No site corresponding to either name has
VI. 46-66.] DWELLING-PLACES OF LEVITES 141
been found. — Belh-horon]. There were an upper and a lower
Bcth-horon (2 Ch. 8^) "near the head and the foot respectively
of the ascent from the Maritime Plain to the plateau of Ben-
jamin, and represented to-day by Beit 'Ur el foka and Beit
'Ur et tahta." The towns are a little over two miles apart and
some ten or twelve miles north-west of Jerusalem. For refer-
ences to these to\\Tis and their ascent cf. Jos. lo'" '• 165- ^ 18'^ '■
21" I S. i3'« 2 K. 8^ 2 Ch. 8=' 25'3. Between v." <^8' and v."
(69), intentionally (Be.) or carelessly (Bn.), has been omitted Jos.
21" "And from the tribe of Dan Elteke and its suburbs and
Gibbethon and its suburbs."— 54 (69). Aijalon] a city of Dan;
mod. village of Ydlo, a little to the north of the Jaffa road,
about thirteen miles from Jerusalem. Cf. for references 8'^ 2 Ch.
9'» 28' 8 Jos. 19" 21=^ Ju. 1^5 I s. 14". The valley of Aijalon
was a famous battle-field (cf. GAS. HGHL. pp. 210-13).—
Gath-rimmon] (Jos. 19^^ 2i-< f) ^^^ identified; probably a little
to the east of Joppa.— 55 (70). Instead of 'Aner ("Uy) read
after Jos. 21" Taanach ("[^Vri), the frequently mentioned city
of the plain of Esdraelon (cf. 7" Jos. 12=' 17" 19'^ «■ 21^5 Ju.
I" 5' 9 I K. 4'2), mod. Tcianmik some four and a half miles
south-southwest from Lejjiin (Megiddo) (BDB.). — Read also
instead of 5//e aw (^^"72) Ible'am (CV^2''). Cf. Jos. 17" Ju.
I". Jos. 2V-^ has by dittography Gath-rimmon, but (S^ le/3a6a,
hence Dill., Bennett, SBOT., ct ciL, as above. Ihleam was also
in the plain of Esdraelon and its name appears preserved in
the Wady Befameli in which the village Jemn lies (Baed.'' p.
223). — The words for the rest of the families* of the sons of Kehath
are a fragment of Jos. 2V-^, which reads: "All the cities of the
families of the rest of the children of Kehath were ten with their
suburbs." The compiler or transcriber, having omitted Jos. 21",
felt compelled to omit the numeral, but retained the adjoining
words, then meaningless. — 56 (71). From the family of the half-
tribe, etc.] a use oi family before the name of tribe arising from
abbreviation of text in Jos. 21" where the word is plural and refers
to the Gershonites (v. ■/.). — Golan] a city of uncertain site which
gave its name to the district Gaulanitis mentioned by Josephus
(Ant. xvii. 8. i. xviii. 4. 6), and appears in the mod. Jaulan
142 I CHRONICLES
east of the Jordan and Sea of Galilee (EBi. II. col. 1748) (Dt. 4"
a city of refuge, Jos. 20^ 21" f). — 'AsJilaroth] mentioned with
Edrei as one of the royal cities of Og King of Bashan (Dt. i< Jos.
9'" i2< 13'^). The name indicates that it was a seat of the worship
of Ashtoreth. Its location has not been clearly fi.\ed. Some
identify it with el Mezeirib, some twenty-five miles east of the
southern end of the Sea of Galilee, others with el 'Ash'ari, some
three miles north of that place (DB. I. pp. 166 /.).— 57 (72).
Read according Jos. 21=' Kishion (|1''w'?:!) (cf. Jos. 192°) instead
of Kedesh (tyip) (Dill., Bn.). Conder prefers Kedesh, which he
thinks may be identified near Ta'anach (DB. III. p. 4). The
former place has not been identified. — Daberath] Jos. ig'^ 2i=« f.
the present Debiirige at the foot of Mt. Tabor (BDB.).— 58 (73).
Ramoth] same as Remeth Jos. 192' (Bn.), rood. Er Rameh in
southern part of plain of Esdraelon (Baed.'' p. 222). Ki. prefers
Yarmuth of Jos. 21" (BH.). — 'Anem] (Ciy) a scribal error, is
'Ain-gannim ("""ji ]■•*?) Jos. 21" 19=1, mod. Jeuhi near the
south-east end of the plain of Esdraelon; a village now of some
importance, with 1,500 inhabitants (Baed.< p. 223). — 59 (74).
lUashal] (t'w'!2) better after Jos. 22^0 Alish'al (^Su!2), site un-
kno^^'n. — 'Abdon] (Jos. 2130 -f-) mod. ' Abdeh ten or more miles
north by east of Acco and some five east of Achzib. — 60 (75).
Hiikok] (p'ipn). Read after Jos. 21 3' Helkath (r,pbn), cf. Jos.
19" I, the site is uncertain. — Rehob]. This to^\^l in Asher has not
been located. It is to be distinguished from the Rehob at the head
of the Jordan valley (Nu. 13=' i S. 10^ • «), and also the one men-
tioned in Jos. 19'". — 61 (76). Kedesh in Galilee] (Jos. 213=),
Kedesh-naphtali (Ju. 4*), elsewhere simply Kedesh (Jos. 12" 19"
Ju. 4' «• 2 K. 15"), a city of refuge, the home of Barak, a place
of importance mentioned by Josephus, mod. village of Kcdes, west
of Lake Huleh. — H amnion] Hammoth-dor (Jos. 21") Hammath
(Jos. 19"). Probably Hammoth is the true reading (cf. Xo/aw^
(^^) and the town is the mod. Hanimdm a short distance south of
Tiberias (DB. II. p. 290). — Kiriathaim] (~\"',''"',p) a variation of
Kartan (jmp) Jos. 21 ^2, not identified. — 62 (77). Levites as in
Jos. 21" must be supplied after the rest (C*"""), otherwise the
expression is meaningless. — Two cities of Zebulun, Jokne am and
VI. 46-66.] DWELLING-PLACES OF LEVITES 143
KartaJi, mentioned in Jos. 2i'% have fallen from the text (</. (B^).
— Instead of Rimmono (13112^) read Rimmon, since the last syllable
has arisen from a union with a following waw (*) (cf. Jos. 19"), or
perhaps Rimmonah. Jos. 2135 has Dimnah (nJDl). Rimmon
has been identified with Rummaneh north of Nazareth (DB.)
— Instead of Tabor ('^\^2D), which is nowhere mentioned as a
city of Zebulun, but on the border of Issachar Jos. 21", Jos.
2i» has Nahalal {bhT\l), mentioned also in Jos. 1915 Ju. i",
not clearly identified (Moore, Ju. p. 49, but see DB. III. p. 472).
Ki. Kom. has a lacuna in place of any name. — 63 (78). And
beyond the Jordan at Jericho, east of Jordan]. These words are
wanting in % in Jos., although the first three (inn"" i"n^^ l^yai)
appear in ^^^ Jos. 2i36. On the expression tlie Jordan at
Jericho cf. Nu. 22' 26^ Jos. 208. The cities mentioned in
vv. 63(7S)-66(8n correspond exactly with those given in Jos. 21^^-^'^.
—Bezer] a city of refuge (Dt. 4" Jos. 2o») mentioned on the
Moabite stone; not identified. The phrase in the wilderness,
wanting in || in Jos. (cf Jos. 20 s) but appearing in ^^^, and fol-
lowed by "plain" (■lir''a) in Dt. 4^^ Jqs. 20^, shows the location
of the city in the flat table-land east of the Jordan. — Jahzah] a city
also assigned to Moab (Is. 15' Je. 48=^) on the border of the territory
of the Amorites (Nu. 21" Dt. 2'=), location unknown. — 64 (79).
Kedemoth] somewhere north of the upper Arnon, not identified
(BDB.). — Mepha'ath] mentioned as in Moab Je. 48-', not identi-
fied.— 65 (80). Ramoth in Gile'ad] one of the cities of refuge (Dt.
4'3 Jos. 20»), mentioned in wars between Syria and Israel i K.
22' «•, At the battle of Ramoth-gilead Ahab was slain (i K.
22"-"). The location is uncertain: sites suggested Reimiin, es
Salt, and Jerash, the last directly east of Samaria and some
twenty-three miles beyond the Jordan, with probability in its
favour (Selah Merrill, E. of the Jordan, pp. 284 ff.). — Mahanaim]
a place of note east of Jordan {cf. Gn. 32= 2 S. 2* f- 17=' " 19^=
I K. 28 4''), identification not certain. — 66 (81). Heshbon]
the former capital of Sihon, King of the Amorites (Nu. 21=5),
assigned to Moab (Je. 48^^)^ mod. Hesbdn some fifteen miles
east of where the Jordan empties into the Dead Sea. — Jazer] an
important town; a district of Reuben was called "the land of
144 I CHRONICLES
Jazer" (Nu. 32', also mentioned Nu. 32'- 35 Jos. 13" 21" 2 S.
24' I Ch. 26", and assigned to Moab Is. 168 '■ Je. 48'^).
Jerome placed it eight or ten miles west of Philadelphia and
fifteen miles from, i.e., north of, Heshbon {Onom. 86. 24. 131.
18). Merrill regards this as correct and identifies with Khiirbet
Sar (DB. II. p. 553).
51. ninDrr)-:i] rendered in RV. as a partitive, is better read after
Jos. 21=" and (S^, B, 'C^^ (Be., Ke., Zoe., Bn., Ki.). — a^i^j] is a copyist's
error for D^-wi in their lot, but this error may have been taken over from
Jos. by the Chronicler, since (&^^ of Jos. have tCov Upiuv ai^rwc, doubtless
a corruption of 05'^ t. opiuv a. = dSuj. — 52 . See text. n. on v. *-. —
53. Here and in the following verses the numbers found in Jos. are
wanting. — 55. ay':'3] 05^ omits, ^I/SXaa/i, ^le^Xaafi = aj'Sa' (v. s.). —
rnau-::''] should be pointed as pi. after Jos. — 56. The text of Jos. 21"
is 'v^ nj3 ixna a>iSn nnsrsa punj ^:2'^^. — The words the city of refuge
of the manslayer appear in Jos. before Golan. — 58. riiCN"^] Jos. 21='
mc-)'_, but Jos. 19=' nc-i.
VII. 1-5. The genealogy of Issachar. — Of this section, only
V. ■ is derived from canonical sources {v. i.). The remainder was
either composed by the Chronicler or is from an unknown source.
Instead of closing with an account of dwelling-places, there is a
record of the number of fighting men, as is also the case in the
records of Zebulun {v. i.) and Asher {cf. v. *''). — 1. And the sons
of Issachar Tola' and Pu'ah and Jashuh and Shimron]. Cf. for
source Gn. 46'^ Nu. 26" '-. In Ju. 10' we read of one of the minor
judges. Tola' the son of Pti'ah, the son of Dodo a man of Issachar
and he was dwelling in Shamir. This shows that traditions
varied in respect to the relationship of the clans of Tola' and
Ptiah; but the former if not the more ancient was clearly the more
pre-eminent. It is possible that the four sons of Issachar are sim.ply
reflections of the statement given above in the form, Tola the son
of Pii'ah dwelling in Shamir; Jashub derived from dwelling
(iwl"') {(f. the variation Job ^T* in Gn. 46 '3) and Shimron from
Shamir ('T'fiw); ^^^ "'^^^^ versa, that the late editor of the "Minor
Judges" came on this concise list of names in P and constructed
his statements therefrom (cf. H. W. Hogg in OLZ. vol. 3 (1900)
col. 367). Shimron has been regarded as standing for the city
Vn. 1-5] GENEALOGY OF ISSACHAR I45
of Samaria (Nocldeke, EBi. III. col. 3275).— 2. And the sons oj
Told were 'Uzzi and Rephaiah and Jeri'el f and Jahmai f and
Jibsam f and Shemu'el heads of their fathers^ houses mighty men
of valor]. The first, third, and fourth of these names look like
those of ancient clans, while the second appears late, and thus
is suggested a combination of early and late traditions. — Accord-
ing to their genealogical divisions, etc.]. The writer has prob-
ably preserved here and in the following verses midrashic
interpretations of David's census (2 S. 24). — 3. The sons of
'Uzzi present a group of late names (Gray, HPN. p. 238). —
Five]. The four grandsons were reckoned as sons. — All of them
were heads] or altogether there were five heads, five distinct
families or clans. — 4. Ajid with them]. The reference is to the
five clans or families of v. ' which numbered 36,000 warriors. —
5. And the reckoning * of all the families of Issachar, the
mighty men of valor, was altogether 87,000]. In v. ^ the sons of
Tola, six clans, are numbered at 22,600; in v. ^ the sons of
Uzzi, five clans, 36,000. These two together make 58,600, leaving
28,400 to be furnished by the remainder of the tribe, i.e., the
clans Puah, Jashub, and Shimron, and also Tola reckoning
him as a clan distinct from his sons {v. Bn. in loco). In Nu. i"
the warriors of Issachar were 54,400, in Nu. 26^5 64,300.
1. ^JiSi] for the construction see Ges. § 143^. Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau.,
Bn., prefer to emend to ^J3i. (St^ /cat ovtol vlol = •'J3 n':'[<i, cf. 2' 3'. —
nxiD] Gn. 4613, Nu. 26^3 ma. -a^u-;] Qr. {cf. (g, H) 3ir;. Gn. ar
is a text, error, SBOT. (see above for an original ycv). — 2. ySin'^] an
addition defining annx rria, appears a corruption (Zoe.) and should be
struck out. — a.nn^.nS] is better connected with the last half of the
verse (Be., Ke., Ki.). — 5. Dn>nNi] Bn. after Klo. reads aiymnni, as in vv.
7b 9. 40b and removes the following D'li'nTini. Possibly an original c has
fallen out before an^nNi, the preceding word ending in a. Then i is a
corruption for \ and we should read 'N JD and connect with the preceding
verse, translating /or they had more wives and sons than their brethren.
Ctt'n\-im should be transposed to a position after an^nN, and final So*?
should be struck out. — a-'V^n i-(nj] v. Ges. § 124^.
VII. 6-11. The genealogy of Zebulun. — This genealogy
which 1^ apparently ascribes to Benjamin is peculiar. The intro-
ductory words The sons of are wanting; nowhere else in ^ are
10
146 I CHRONICLES
the sons of Benjamin limited to three; Jedia'el is elsewhere un-
known as a Benjaminite name, a most striking thing when the
sons of Benjamin are so often mentioned; and this section as a
Benjaminite genealogy forms a doublet to c. 8.
Not only are the names of the sons of Bela (v. ') entirely different
from those in any other list of his sons {cf. 8^ Nu. 26^° and (^ of Gn.
46*'), but they are uncommon or unknown to the tribe of Benjamin.
While the other lists of Bela's sons differ from each other, showing
variant traditions, they are agreed in employing the same names.
On the other hand, Ezbon is only found elsewhere as a son of Gad
(Gn. 46'^, cf. Nu. 26'=); 'Uzzi is a common priestly and Levitical
name Ne. 12"- ■"^ i Ch. 5'' '■ (6^ «■) 6^6 «•) Ezr. 7^ Ne. ii^^, appears
among the descendants of Issachar (7^ ^) and once as a Benja-
minite (9') ; Uzzi'el, though a very comm'm name, is not Benjamin-
ite; Jerimoth (mQ"'"!'') is a Benjaminite name in 8'« (mO"!''), but
there we should probably read Jerohajn (cni'') with 8", cf. 9'
(Jerimoth of i2« (*) is doubtless a Judean name, v. in loco); Iri does
not occur elsewhere. Thus we have apparently a variant tradi-
tion which has only one certain Benjaminite name and that a
common one elsewhere.
The case is similar with the sons of Becher (v. «). Of these,
Zemirah occurs only here (but cf. Zimri 85«); Jo ash, Eliezer,
Elio'enai (but cf. Elienai 82"), 'Omri, and Abijah are more or less
common but unknown as Benjaminite names; the same is likely
true of Jeremoih (see above, Jerimoth). The last two names,
'Anathoth and 'Alemeth, on the other hand, are common Benjaminite
names. 'Anathoth occurs elsewhere as a personal name only in Ne.
1020 (19)^ where the tribe is not given, but is frequent as a place-name
in Benjamin. 'Alemeth is also a place-name of Benjamin and is a
personal name in 83« and 9". Only these two, therefore, are cer-
tainly Benjaminite and they alone are geographical.
Of the third branch (v. '") not only Jedia'el but his son Bilhan
and his grandsons Chenaanah, Zethan, Tarshish, and Ahishahar
are not known as Benjaminites. Je ush (Kt. tl'^y) is met with
in 8^9 (tyiy), and a Benjaminite Ehud (nnS), the son of Gera,
is familiar from Ju. 3''- '= +. Benjamin, the son of Bilhan, is
imknown.
Vn. 6-13.] GENEALOGY OF ZEBULUN 147
This genealogy of Benjamin is not only unique in its content
but is in the wrong place in a geographical arrangement of the
tribes, and a doublet {y. s.). Now, the genealogy of Zebulun is
wanting in the Chronicler's account. Kittel (Kom.) indicates his
belief that the original text contained this tribe by supposing a
lacuna after Naphtali (7'^). But Zebulun belongs rather after
Issachar, whom he follows in thirteen out of seventeen OT. lists,
including 2' '• and 27 '^ «■ {cf. also 12^2 f. 12^0 2 Ch. 30"*), but not
546 ff. (61 ff.) where the order is not the Chronicler's but dependent
on Jos. 21. In five more — in three of which the principle of
arrangement seems to be geographical from south to north — the
order of these two is reversed. Thus we have the strange genealogy
of Benjamin just where the lost one of Zebulun should be.
Further there is a striking similarity between the list of Zebulun's
sons as given in Gn. 46'^ and the names appearing in the first verse
of our list, as follows:
Gn. 46'^ h^hn^\ j'^sT mD xh2^ •'jm
I Ch. r ntr^tr ^syn^i n^m '^hi ]^^^2.
If the former was the original reading in i Ch. 7« plus the
Chronicler's addition of r'^'h^, it is easy to see how the present
reading arose in copying. T "'Ja was read as |12''i2; 'hi as y^2;
TlD I as nsm {cf. ""13, v. =", = "iSn Nu. 26^5). The last two of
course followed as a necessary result of the first from the influ-
ence of Gn. 46", and the well-known Zebulunite jl^S {cf. Ju.
12" ') had to be cancelled, as the final "tl'^u required only
three names. ^SVT' is then a corruption of b^bu"' (for y as
a corruption of h, cf. v. '% n^VQ for TiD^u)"), a corruption
which may have been in the Chronicler's text of Genesis.
This hypothesis explains: the absence of initial ""ii; the other-
wise unknowTi ^SyT" as a son of Benjamin; the final "w^tl'
when Gn. 46^1 (|^) knows ten sons of Benjamin (but corrected
text nine, see on 8' -5), Nu. 2658 '■ five, and i Ch. 8' f- five; the
strangeness of the following names; and eliminates the doublet
while restoring the missing Zebulun in the proper place.
When once the error had been made, the tendency to make
the table plainly Benjaminite would naturally be strong. Bela and
Becker in vv. '• * followed of necessity. ^ has carried the matter
148 I CHRONICLES
Still farther by substituting '^ ^'■j (doubtless an error for Va.4,] =
^SU-'K) for ^SyT* in vv. '■ '"■ ". Anathoth and Alemeth were
added to the list of v. », none of the others being geographical, and
Ehud was inserted into v. '" from Ju. 3'^ It is tempting to suppose
that the anomalous Benjamin had the same origin. Then the
first scribe simply placed '»i''D''n~jD HlnS on the margin, and
these words made their way into the text in reverse order as
separate names. This tendency to add Benjaminite names is
illustrated further by the appendix Shuppim also and Huppim
(v. i^") from Gn. 46^', which is out of place even as the list stands
{cf. n'^^ty V. ^).
In spite of the meagreness of Zebulunite material in the OT.,
there are some striking points of contact between this genealogy
and Zebulun besides the resemblances of the names of v. « to
Gn. 46'^ pn^S (v. ') suggests ]:fn« (Ju. 12^-10), a "minor
judge" of Bethlehem of Zebulun (see Moore, Judges, p. 310).
It is significant that (^^^ (probably representing the original Greek
tradition) in Ju. read EcreySeoy =]"!:}^i<, making it still more
probable that we have the same name in both passages, the Chron-
icler having found it with the second and third consonants trans-
posed. This judge is introduced here just as Elon, the other
Zebulunite judge, is in Gn. 46", and as Tola, the judge of Issachar
(Ju. 10'), in Gn. 46'3 and i Ch. 7'- 2. A point of contact with
Zebulun is found also in the striking name Tarshish, in v. '°,
which is unknown as a Hebrew man's name. As is well known,
this name stands in the OT. for all great shipping interests. Now,
the special characterisation of Zebulun in Gn. 49 '^ is the fact
that he shall be "a haven for ships (D'^JS)." Such a connection
with Tarshish could be given to no other tribe, and least of all to
the inland tribe of Benjamin.* Furthermore, the name Che-
naanah, found elsewhere only as the father of the prophet Zedekiah
(i K. 22" 24 = 2 Ch. iS'"- "), a favourite with Ahab (!), with the
meaning "toward Canaan," i.e., Phoenicia, is singularly appro-
priate in a tribe of which the same passage in Gn. says, "his
border shall be upon Sidon."
* That p35!N - li'3N and that Tarshish is more appropriate as a Zebulunite name
were suggested by Professor C. C. Torrey after reading the preceding.
vn. 6-13.] GENEALOGY OF ZEBULUN 149
Aside from this passage Zebulunite names are few in the OT.
Among the princes of the tribes during the Wilderness Period
was an EUab the son of Helon as prince of Zebulun (Nu. i' 2'
y2i. 29 io'«), and a Gadiel son of Zodi represented the tribe as one
of the spies (Nu. 13'"). At the division of the land Elizaphan the
son of Pamach was the prince who acted for this tribe (Nu. 34").
Among the judges we find the Zebulunites Ibzan and Elon (Ju.
12" ') {v. s.). The Chronicler's list of the captains of the tribes
in the time of David contains the Zebulunite Ishmaiah son of
Obadiah (i Ch. 27'»).
The emended text of this genealogy is rendered as follows : 6. The
sons of Zebulun'^: Sered*, and Elon*, and Jahle'el* (or Jedia'el),
three. 7. And the sons of Sered*: Ezhon, and 'Uzzi, and 'Uzzi'el,
and Jerimoth, and 'Iri,\ five; ... 8. And the sons of Elon*:
Zemirah-\, and Jo ash, and Eltezer, and Elidenai, and 'Omri, and
Jeremoth, and Abijah. All these were the sons of Elon*. 9. . . .
10. And the sons of Jahle'el* (or Jedufel): Bilhan. And the
sons of Bilhan: Je'iish, and Chena'anah, and Zethan^, and
Tarshish, and Ahishahar-\. 11. All these were the sons of
Jahle'el * (or Jedia'el) . . .
The total enrolment of the warriors of Zebulun is here 22,034
(v. ') + 20,200 (v. 9) + 17,200 (v. ") = 59,434 against 50,000
(12" ("'), 57,400 (Nu. !«')> 60,500 (Nu. 26").
While Zebulun's genealogy appears clearly, as stated above, in
behalf of the view generally held that the genealogy is that of Ben-
jamin, Jediael may be regarded as the equivalent of Ashbel men-
tioned in the list of Benjamin's sons in 8' Gn. 46" Nu. 26^8 — ■{. e.,
" Known of God " has been substituted through religious scruples
for "Man of Baal" (<-/. for similar changes of names 3^ 8'<f); then
may be emphasised the presence of the Benjaminite names Jerimoth
(vv. ' f), Anathoth and Alemeth (v. ^), Benjamin and Ehud (v. »»),
and Shuppim and Huppim (v. " v. i.).
6 . SsynM 1331 ^^1 pD'J3] read instead (or ^Nvnii) '^sSmi p^Ni "iiD pS3r <J2
restored from Gn. 461* {v. s.). — 7. ySa] read T\D {v. s.). — 8. -\33 bis]
read ii^n {v. s.). — nnSj?! ninjyi] as a later gloss should be struck out
(■y. 5.). — 10. Snj,'''T'] read possibly Ss'?n\ so also in v. ", and strike out
JD1J31 niHNI {v. s.).
150 I CHRONICLES
12. The genealogy of Dan. — The first two names in this
verse, Shuppim and Huppim, are a late addition to the preceding
section derived from Gn. 46=' (restored text) Nu. 26", and are a
part of the process by which that genealogy was made over from
being Zebulunite to Benjaminite {v. s. on vv. «■")• The endings
should be am as in Nu. and not im as though plural, since the
adjectives are Huphamite (••ttSin) and Shuphamite OlSSIir)-—
The sons of Dan, Hjishim his son, one*] {v. i.) The name 7r
doubtless arose from a corrupt text through the influence of 'hi,
V. '. Hnshim appears as the one son of Dan in Gn. 46", and in Nu.
26" as Shtiham. Hushim as a Benjaminite name in the corrupt
passage 8'", probably helped to corrupt this passage after the
preceding had been made a Benjaminite genealogy {v. s.). Aher
("ins), M, seems very probably a corruption of the numeral one
(ins), since to add the number was a favourite practice of the
Chronicler, cf. vv. '■ «• ' et al, and lack of genealogical material
was a special reason for the addition here.
12. Dam DBCilarea later addition, cf. Gn. 46« Nu. 26" {v. s.).—
-\nH ^J3 aa-n -i'>' 'J3] read with Kb. PRE. -"riN ua Dtt-n p 'J3, The sons of
Dan Hnshim his son one on the basis of Gn. 46" and (6 which read iJ3.
This seems preferable to finding ]■^ hidden in inx (Be.). Bacher thinks
i^y ^J3, " sons of the city," euphemistic for JT ^J3, to which the Chron-
icler objected because of the idolatry practised by the Danites (Ju. iS^o
I K. 12=9), and compares the Talmudic use of i^y for 'cn (Rome);
nn« >J3 has a similar import and is a gloss to n>>' >J3 {ZAW. xviii.
(1898), pp. 236-8).
13. The genealogy of Naphtali, cf Gn. 46'* ' Nu. 26*' ' .—
This brief genealogy is taken word for word from Gn. 46" «• with
the single omission of tJiese before sons of Bilhah which stood in
the original clause with reference to the sons of Dan as well as
those of Naphtali.
13. '-N'xn'] 23 Mss., Gn. 46" Nu. 26^8 without the second >. — DiSri]
seven mss., Gn. and Nu. 26" oWi.
VII. 14-29. Manasseh and Ephraim.— The Chronicler
groups the two sons of Joseph together, giving (i) the genealogy
of Manasseh (vv. '<-•»), (2) the genealogy of Ephraim (w. "-"), (3)
Vn. 14-19.] GENEALOGY OF M.^NASSEH 151
dwelling-places of Ephraim (v. "), (4) dwelling-places of Manas-
seh (v. "). The genealogy of Manasseh, while not without con-
nection with those given in Jos. 17= ^- Nu. 26^9 a , is presented in
quite an independent form. Kittel (SBOT. Korn.) ascribes it to
an older source. To the same source he gives w. 2' <f'-°'" ""«' f«'-)-2*
of the genealogy of Ephraim. There is no reason to doubt that
vv. *«-" belong to the original compilation of the Chronicler,
since it can hardly be contended (with Bn.) that the Chronicler
does not describe the dwelling-places elsewhere (r/. 4"^- 5*"' », etc.).
The contents of these verses are derived from Jos. 16* "■ 17" «•,
which were rewritten by the Chronicler. It appears that instead
of trying to give all the dwelling-places of these two tribes, the
writer intends to describe their combined territory by giving the
cities on the southern and on the northern borders. Shechem, be-
longing to Ephraim, then, defines the boundary between the two
tribes. Possibly Ayyah, whose site is unknown, was given for the
same purpose.
14-19. The genealogy of Manasseh. — 14. The sons of Ma-
nasseh* which his Aramaic concubine bore: she bore Machir the
father of Gile'ad]. This statement is identical with On. 46='"'
(^. Machir appears as the eldest son of Manasseh and as the father
of Gilead in Jos. 17'- ' and Nu. 36'. In Gn. 50" the birth of
Machir and also of his sons is placed in Egypt. The descent here
given from an Aramaic concubine points to a different story and
arose probably from the close association and admixture of the
Manassites east of the Jordan with the Arameans. In Ju. 5'*
Machir represents a tribe in Israel, evidently Manasseh. He
is called the father of Gilead because the clan of Machir conquered
Gilead. — 15. And Gilead took a wife whose name was Maacah
and the name of his sister was Hammolecheth f and the name of his
brother Zelophhad *]. Ma'acah represents the small Aramean
kingdom, district, or people situated east of the Sea of Galilee near
Mt. Hermon, hence either adjoining the territory of Manasseh
Dt. 3'* Jos. 125 or included in it Jos. 13". Cf. 2 S. io« where
the King of Ma'acah is hired against David, and Gn. 222*
where Ma'acah the tribal father appears as a son of Nahor.
Ma'acah the wife of Gilead reflects the same histoiical circum-
152 I CHRONICLES
stances as the Aramean concubine, v. ". Hammolecheth (she who
reigns) (riD^Qn) is to be compared with Milcah (queen) (nD^i2)
the wife of Nahor (Gn. 11"), and reflects probably, with Ma'acah,
a close connection with the Arameans. While the name here may
be tribal (Gray, HPN. p. 116), it undoubtedly was originally a
divine title. In Nu. 26-^-^^ (P) Zelophhad is given as the fourth
in descent from Manasseh through Machir, Gilead, and Hepher.
— 16. 17. And Ma'acah the wife of Gilead"^ bore a son and called
his name Peresh f and the name of his brother icas Sheresh f; and
his sons, Ulam and Rekem; and the sons of Ulam, Bedan-\: these are
the sons of Gilead, etc.]. These sons or clans are otherwise en-
tirely unknown. For a reoccurrence of the name Ulam cf. 8=',
of Rekem 2'^^- Jo.. 18" Nu. 31 » Jos. 13^'. For further sons of
Gilead connected with the tribe of Judah see 2=' ^^ .— 18. Ishlwd f ].
— Abiezer] in Jos. ij- a son of Manasseh and in Ju. 6"- '='• ^*- '< the
family of Gideon. — Mahlah] in Nu. 2635 27' 36'^ Jos. 17' one of the
daughters of Zelophhad. — 19. Shemida] probably originally stood
also in v. •» as a son of Hammolecheth: a son of Manasseh Jos. 17'-,
a son of Gilead Nu. 26==. — Ahjan f]. — Shechem] a son of Manasseh
Jos. 172, a son of Gilead Nu. 263'. — Lekhi f] ("Tip^) possibly cor-
responds to Helek (p^fl) Nu. 263° Jos. 17=, and Antam •)• (DJ^^iS)
to Noah (nyj) daughter of Zelophhad Nu. and Jos. — The writer
here has not clearly distinguished between the clans of eastern and
western Manasseh. His scheme differs considerably from those
of Jos. and Nu. (see Manasseh in DB. IH.).
14. The name Ashriel (Sn'>i:j'n), while suggested by Jos. 17- Nu. 26'',
where Asriel appears among the sons of Manasseh or Gilead, is proba-
bly a dittograph}- arising from the following rn*?> la's* and is to be struck
out of the text (Mov., Be., Zoe., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki.). — -15. The present
text nnfl'^x ■'jL-n ai'i noyn iPnN Dw'i di3-'Si O'snS r\z'H ni-iS T'dsi yields the
following: And Machir took a wife of Huppim and Shuppim (i.e.,
of these Benjaminite families, cf. v. '2) and the name of his sister was
Ma'acah and the name of the second Zelophhad. But according to vv.
16. 18 Ma'acah was the wife of Machir and Hammolecheth his sister.
Mov. changed Vnnx to nriN and read and the name of the first was
Ma'acah and the name of the second Zelophhad. But Zelophhad in Nu.
2633 27'-^ 36=-'2 Jos. 173 is a man. The connection of Machir or his wife
with Huppim and Shuppim looks strange also. Hence these words
Vn. 20-29.] GENE.\LOGY OF EPHRAIM 1 53
are better regarded as a gloss from v. •= or an original position on the
margin and the text further emended as follows: nca-i n::'N npS Tjhi
nno'^x vns os:'i n3'?Dn inns d-'i hdvo with translation above (Bn., Ki.).
Gilead is read instead of Machir as the husband of Maacah because the
sons given in v. " are called the sons of Gilead, hence in v. '" Gilead is to
be read instead of Machir.
20-29. The genealogy of Ephraim.— (C/. Ephraim Gene-
alogy, Hogg, JQR. XIII. [Oct. 1900] p. 147.) Viewing this section
as a whole, it exhibits little dependence upon OT. sources and
shows considerable complication of material or is very corrupt. —
20. 2V. This line of descent abruptly ending in v. ='» may origi-
nally have formed a part of one of Joshua and suffered the inter-
ruption of vv. ^^^--*. 'Ezer and Elead cannot have been its final
members in this connection, because the context regards them as
immediate sons and not later descendants of Ephraim. But what-
ever the design of this line of descent, it has been constructed out
of a list of sons of Ephraim similar to that in Nu. ad'^ ' . These
may originally have completed the statement. And the sons of
Ephraim. These sons were Shuthelah (n^mtT), Becher (1:33),
here Bered (TlS), Tahan (jnn), here Tahath (nnn), and also
'Eran (pj?) son of Shuthelah (r/. Laadan p^b v.=«). The
two names 'Ezer and Ele'ad, v. ^i (the latter occasioning Eleadah
V. "), seem on the other hand to have belonged to the narrative
2ib-i4^ which is entirely independent of the material of Nu. Zabad
(13T) v.=' may be derived from and Bered (T131). (On whether
Becher or Bered belonged to the earliest list of Ephraim's sons,
V. Hogg art. s., also EBi. col. 1320). — 2l''-24. A story explain-
ing the name of Beri'ah, the founder probably of Beth-horon
and possibly a reputed ancestor of Joshua. — And the men of Gath
who were natives in the land slew them] i.e., 'Ezer and Ele'ad,
because they came down to take away their cattle. This patri-
archal story is difficult of explanation. In the light of the story
of the sojourn in Egypt, this raid, if by immediate sons of Eph-
raim, must have been made from Egypt, in spite of the ex-
pression "go down" (1"!''). This was the explanation of the
earlier commentators, who regarded Ephraim and his children as
historical persons. But the use of T\% "go down," points almost
154 I CHRONICLES
conclusively to a foray from Mt. Ephraim into the plains of
Philistia, and this little narrative is probably a reminiscence of
some such event (Be., Ki.). Two Ephraimitic families, '.Ezer and
Elead, probably were destroyed in such a raid, and the original
Ephraim, who mourned many days, was the tribe or the hill country.
Cf. Rachel weeping in Je. 31'^ Or the narrative may be entirely
imaginary, a purely etymological legend to explain the Ephraimitic
family name Ben ah (ny'l^ as though derived from nj?i;i "in
evil"). (On this narrative cf. Ew\ Hist. I. p. 380; Sayce, Pat.
Pal. p. 202; We. Prol. p. 214; EBi. Beri'ah.) — Bert ah] a Le-
vitical name 23'°, also that of a son of Asher w. '" '■ Gn. 46''
Nu. 26^% and in the list of the descendants of Benjamin 8"- '«.
See further on vv. ^° ' . — 24. And his daughter was She'erah f
and she built Beth-horon the lower and the upper, and Uzzen-
she'erah |]. This verse in its present form is suspicious because
elsewhere in the OT. the founders of cities are men. — Beth-
horon]. Cf. 6" '«»). — Uzzen-she'erah] as a place is entirely un-
identified and otherwise unknown. — 25. And Rephah f his son
and Resheph f ]. The present text of v. " suggests her son instead
of Jiis son. Perhaps after Resheph, "his son" should also be
supplied {Yi\.).—And Telah-\] (nSl) an abbreviation probably
of Shuthelah (n'?ntr) v. ^K—Tahan]. Cf. Tahath v. =».— 26.
La dan] (]Tyb probably from py with '7 prefixed see \-v. "• '■),
elsewhere a Levite name 23^ ' 26^'. — 'Ammihud] and Elishamd]
are taken from Nu. i'", where the latter the son of the former
is the "head" of Ephraim, but only here is Nun (v. ") the
father of Joshua brought into connection with them. — 27. This
is the only record of Joshua's line of descent and its late and
artificial character reveals itself at once. — Non] (jlj) elsewhere
in OT. Nun (jli). — 28. A brief description of the possessions
of Ephraim through the mention of the southern boundary
Bethel, mod. Beitin, ten miles north of Jerusalem, the eastern
Naaran (Jos. 16' Na'arah) placed by Jerome and Eusebius
within five miles of Jericho, not identified (Bn., but see EBi.),
the western Gezer, and evidently the northern Shechem unto the
unknown 'Ayyah or 'Azzah. — 29. Four principal and well-knowTi
towns of Manasseh are here enumerated, beginning with Beth-
Vn. 30-40.] GENE.\LOGY OF ASHER 1 55
shean, mod. Beisdn, on the east in the Jordan valley, and passing
westward through the plain of Esdraelon, where Taanach mod.
Taannak, and Megiddo mod. el-LejjUn (Baed." p. 224), are
located, to Dor mod. Tantura on the coast. CJ. Jos. 17" Ju. i".
— These two verses in contents are agreeable to Jos. 16* ^- 17" ^
but not in form, and hence are either a composition of the Chron-
icler or from the source of the genealogies given above.
24. 25*. Hogg {op. cit.) restores as follows: no rn nja -\z'n Nin
-lani D-im-'j; hni ivS^-n nxi pnnnn |mn, He it was that built Beth-horon
the lower and the upper and 'Irheres {cf. Tininath-heres Ju. 2^) and
Hepher (Jos. 12''). — 25. T^'ii] ten mss. + 1J3. — 28. n;j;] many mss.
and editions (including the Bomberg Bible) ni^. — 29. 01 IJJ/n] <B +
Kal BaXaaS Kal ai Kw/xai avr^s, cf. Jos. 17" n>mj3i D;;SoM.
•
30-40. The genealogy of Asher. — 30. 31. And the sons of
Asher, Jininah and Jishvah and Jishvi and Benah and Serah,
their sister, and the sons of Bert ah, Heber and Malchi^el]. This
statement is identical with Gn. 46". In Nu. 26^! '• Jishvah
(nVw'^) is wanting; and hence Jishvah (nlw''') and Jishvi (''ID'')
represent the same clan, the dittography already appearing in
Gn. In Jimnah (nJD'') one may see a form of Jamin (j"'12'')
right hand, i.e., a southern clan. The appearance of Beriah as a
clan of Ephraim and a family of Benjamin (cf. v. ") has been
alleged to indicate that the tribe of Asher originally came from the
region of Mt. Ephraim and was an offshoot of the early Hebrews
who settled there (Steuernagel, Eimvand. Is. Stdmme, p. 31).
Possibly then a connection might be found between Jimnah and
Benjamin. Heber and Malchi'el are of especial interest because
they seem identical with the Habiri and Malchiel mentioned in the
Amama tablets {JBL. XI. [1892] p. 120, Hom. AHT. p. 233).
A connection also may be seen between Heber and Heber the
Kenite (Ju. 4") (v. Heber EBi.). — The father of Birzaith] a
supplementary clause not in Gn. Birzaith is probably the name
of a town, not identified (n*'n3 prob. =n"'nS'3 "olive-well").
— 32-34. And Heber begat Japhlet f and Shomer ( ?) and Hotham
(?) and Shu a f their sister. And the sons of Japhlet f, Pasach f
and Bimhal f and 'Ashvath f. And the sons of Shemer his
156 I CHROXICLES
brolher* Rohgah f and Hiibbah f and Aram]. Shemer and
Shomer, v. ", are identical, with preference for the former (Bn.,
Ki.). A connection between Hubbah (n^in) and Hobab (iiPI)
Ju. 4" {cf. Heber v. ") has been seen. — 35. And the sons* of Helem
his brother Zophah f and Jimna f and Shelesh f and 'Amal f ].
Heletn is undoubtedly the same as Hotham in v. ^\ but which is
correct cannot be determined. Ki. prefers the latter. — 36. 37.
And the sons of Zophah Siiah f and Harnepher f and Shual and
Beri-\ and Jimrah-\, Bczer and Hod f and Shammah and Shilshah
•j- and Jithran and Be'era ]. — 38. And the sons of J ether, Jephnnneh
and Pispa f and Ara f ]. Jelher is clearly the same as Jithran
V. ". — 39. And the sons of'Ulla, Arah, Hanni'el and Rizia]. 'Ulla
stands clearly by corruption for one of the previously mentioned
"sons," but which one it is impossible to determine. As is seen
from the daggers above, fully one-third of the names of the de-
scendants of Asher occur only here, and the remaining third,
omitting vv. 3' '•, do not occur elsewhere in connection with Asher.
The names are not distinctly personal, and many of them un-
doubtedly represent places as well as families (cf. Bezer v. " a
Reubenite town Dt. 4", Shu al v. ^^, and Sliilsha v. " = Shalisha,
the names of districts i S. 13' 9*). Jithran v. " is the name of
a Horite clan, Gn. 362% and Arah v. " of a family of the return Ezr.
2K These names as a whole, then, are ancient, either preserved in
Asherite families of the time of the Chronicler or taken from some
ancient record about the Asherites (Gray, HPN. pp. 239 /.).—
40. On derivation of these statistics cf. v. ^ — 26,000]. According
to Nu. i^' Asher numbered 41,500 men and according to Nu. 26"
53,400. The census here, however, is evidently confined to the
clan of Heber.
34. In place of >n« with following 1 read rnN his brother, cf. v. '*
(Bn., Ki.). — njni-ii] Qr. njn-11. — nari^] Qr. nam. — 35. Instead of pi
read ''J21, as the context demands. — 37. pnn] two mss. ir?^], <&^ If^fp,
cf. V. '*. — 40. anna] part, of "na only in the writings of the Chronicler,
cf. 922 16" Ne. 5' 8 (1. 16).
VIII. The genealogy of Benjamin.— (C/. Hogg, JQR. XI.
Oct. 1893, pp. 102 Jf.) The conditions here reflected are clearly
Vm. 1-28.] GENEALOGY OF BENJAMIN 1 57
post-exilic, as appears for the following reasons : (a) The places
of residence, not mentioning Jerusalem, are towns recurring in
the post-exilic history — Gibea (v.^), cf. Ezr. 2^^; Lod and Ono
(v. '=), cf. Ezr. 233; Gibeon (v."), cf. Ne. 7". (b) Many of the
names belong also to that period, viz. : Meshidlam, Hanan, Elam,
Hananiah, ' Anthothiah (Anathoth), cf. Ne. lo'"- '<■ '«■ ^o- 23. 25. (c)
The coincidence between the residence in or connection with Moab
(v. «) and the name Pahath-moab representing an important family
among the post-exiHc Jews (Ezr. 2^ 8% etc.). (Be. conjectures
that the birth of this Pahath-moab, "prince of Moab," is referred
to in V. '.) {d) The Benjaminites had a considerable part in the
post-exilic community along with the children of Judah and the
Levites.
1-5. The sons of Benjamin. — And Benjamin begat Bela' his
first born, Ashbel the second and Aharah f the third and Nohah I
the fourth and Kapha the fifth. And the sons of Bela' were Addar
and Gera and Abihiid and Abishim and Na'aman and Ahoah f
and Gera and Shephuphan f and Huram]. This list of sons and
grandsons of Benjamin is a development of the original list of On.
46^' where the sons of Benjamin, in the restored text (Ball.
SBOT), appear as three sets of triplets: Bela', Becher, Ashbel; Gera,
Na'aman, Ahiram; Shupham, Hupham, and Ard. These appear
also in Nu. 2638-", with the variation that Becher and Gera are
lacking, probably through an error of transcription (the former
perhaps having found a place among the sons of Ephraim Nu.
2635), and that Na'aman and Ard are subordinated as sons of
Belci. (In Gn. 4621 (g not only is Na'aman the son of Bela' but
also Gera, Ahiram, Shupham, and Hupham; and Ard becomes the
son of Gera.) Tradition then fluctuated between assigning nine
sons immediately to Benjamin or a portion of them mediately
through Bela'. Examining now the names in our text, if we omit
Abihud and Ahishua (to be considered below) we find that the
others are apparently simply those of the underlying list of Gn.
given, where not identical, in corrupted forms and with repetition.
Becher ("1D3), which seems to be entirely lacking, lies hidden in
first-born (133); Aharah (mnS) and Ahoah (nnS) are tran-
scribers' variations of Ahiram (DITIN); Nohah (nmJ) and
158 I CHRONICLES
Kapha (S5"l) are likewise probably variations of Na'aman
(|Oj;:)and Gera (Sn:); Addar (ms*) of Ard (TiN) and Hiiram
(Dlin) of Hupham (DS*in) (Hogg, op. cit.). Since Nohah and
Kapha are between Ahiram and Ard, Shupham and Hupham,
after the order in Nu., have been, with less probability, found in
them (Ke., Zoe., Bn.)- In regard to Abihiid and Abishiia , which
follow Gera in vv. ' ", these proper names seem to have arisen
from the qualifying phrases /a//zer of Ehud (according to Ju. 3'=^)
and father of Shiia {Shua (yity) appears as a Judahite or Ca-
naanite personal name in Gn. 38=, but most likely here is a cor-
ruption of Shu'al ('?J?Vw'*) a district of Benjamin, i S. 13'')- C)f
these "sons" the hidden Becher appears in the family of Sheba',
who revolted against David (2 S. 20' ^■), and in Bechorath in the
line of the descent of Saul (i S. 9')- Saul probably was of the
clan of Becher (Marquart, Fundamente, pp. 14/.)- In Nu. 26=5
Becher is among the families of Ephraim. Sheba the Bichrite
was also from Mt. Ephraim 2 S. 20='. Such a close connection and
interchange between Benjamin and Ephraim is natural. Ashbel
is equivalent to Ishba al ('73w'N = ^JJ^w'NS), man of Baal, the
name of Saul's son (r/. v. 33). Gera appears in Ju. 3'^ as the
father, i.e., family, of Ehud. The other sons or clans of Benjamin
are not mentioned elsewhere except in the genealogical connections
just given.
6-28. The descendants of Ehud (?). — These verses, '-^s, pre-
sent apparently, with their descent from Ehud the Benjaminite hero
and judge, a list of five heads of fathers, i.e., post-exilic families:
Elpa'al (w. " '• '8), Bert ah (w. '3. is)^ Shejna {Shimei) (vv. '2- ^i),
Shashak (w. '^- ^^), Jeroham (Jeremoth) (w. '<■ -'), with their
sons, i.e., households or sub-families (v\'. i5-=s), residing in Jerusalem
V. 2s (?) (v. i.). Vv. 5-'^, which give their descent or connection
with Ehud, are exceedingly obscure and corrupt, not only from
customary errors of transcriptions in lists of names, but also from
legendary or historical notices which, probably made originally as
marginal notes, became later a portion of the text. — 6. And these
are the sons of Ehud]. The text fails to give these sons of Ehud
who are the heads of fathers (i.e., of families) of Geba' , unless at the
end of v. ' (Be., Ke., Zoe.) or hidden in the utterly obscure sentence
Vm. 1-28.] GENEALOGY OF BENJAMIN 1 59
And they carried them captive to Mahanath (rinJS ^S Dl'?i''T)-
This latter is the view of Hogg {op. cit.), who finds therein the
proper names Iglaam (after the (g^ rendering of ub'yn i'y\aafi in
V. ') and 'Alemeth (cf. '• «). (That ni^^p |1J2^j; should have been
corrupted into riniD bi^ arose from the reading of D^IT as a verb
and thus seeking an expression to correspond to the verbal idea.)
— 7. And Naanian and Ahijah and Gera]. These three names
are clearly a dittography from vv. ■• ' , where they appear in the
same order. Ahijah (nTlH) is a variation of an original
Ahiram (D^TIS). — He carried them away captive: and he
begat 'Uzza and Ahihtid]. One is tempted to see in these ob-
scure words a continuation of the dittography. Cf. the texts
Hogg renders them: And Iglaam begat 'Uzza and Ahishahar].
Ahishahar ("l^D''^^^), a Benjaminite name in 7'" and suggested
by S ha haraitn in v. '% is substituted for Ahihiid (inTlS). (The
text Tb^n Dnntr nn-'n^ n«i becomes n^^i^i nniy^n^ nsi.)
With adherence to the Massoretic text, these verses have yielded
the statement that Ehud's sons mentioned at the end of v. ''
were carried to Manahath, a place of uncertain situation {cf. 2"),
by N daman, Ahijah, and Gera, the last being the principal insti-
gator of their removal (Be., Ke., Zoe.). Others, rejecting this in-
terpretation, regard the verses as corrupt beyond restoration (Kau.,
Ki., Bn.). — 8-11. And Shaharaim begat in the field of Moab
after he had sent the?n away Hitshim and Baara his wives, and
he begat from Hodesh his wife Jobab, etc. . . . these his sons are
the heads of fathers; and from Hushim he begat Abitiih and Elpa'ul.
«nV3 n«i u^u^n ens* inbu jo nsir: m'lrn '&- D^nn*^!
^•^sn ^^:2 nbi< . . . 22^^ n« inir'S D'-n p .ibv) i^t:*:
^VS^K nSl i1t3^:!S* nS n^^in D^*^n::i m^S. These verses,
like the preceding, appear corrupt beyond only the most tenta-
tive restoration; Shaharaim is without connection with foregoing
text; begat v. « has no object; Hushim is elsewhere a man's
name (7'-). The grammatical constructions are also very harsh.
A suggested restoration of vv. «• ' is, And Shaharaim begat
in the field of Moab, after he had driven them {i.e., the Moab-
l6o I CHRONICLES
ites) out, from Hodesh his wife Jobab, etc.] the words omitted
arising from a gloss written by some one who wished to show that
the sons of Hushim had rights of age earlier than the founding of
Lad and 0}io v. " (Bn.). The rendering of Hogg (see above for
the beginning of v. ^) is: A^id he (Iglaam) begat in the field of
Moab Mesha their sister and Htishim (and his wife was Ba'ara).
And A his ha har begat Jobab, etc. These were his sons heads of their
fathers' houses (DHN IH^wT ]!2 =DmnS t<t:'^D; t^^n ]D =nnD^niS;
M^Ui< is a dittography from following 22V)- Possibly, for an-
other rendering of v. «, a fem. proper name is concealed in
inlPw' (r/. t^'in ja V. '). Then DnK is a corruption for in'^'K, and
Vu'2 (which (g read intl'S) is to be struck out, and we have and
Shaharaim begat in the field of Moab of Shilho (?) his wife,
Htishim and Bdara. — 11. According to the text, the sons of Sha-
haraim by his wife Hushim are here enumerated. If, however,
we connect the D of CDTII^l with the last word of v. '", reading
Cm^t< their fathers, Hushim becomes the subject of begat (T'^IH).
(The text originally may have been D'^tiTI H^l"''!.) And hence
he is the father of Abiiub and Elpaal and (omitting the misplaced
clause and the parenthetical clauses) of Beriah, Shetna v. '',
Shashak, and Jeremoth v. »^. These five names, repeated in
Y'v. 16- 18- 21- 25. 27^ clcarly go together as sons of a common ancestor.
Ahio v. '* (ITiK) is not a proper name, but after (^ TTIS or VnS
his brother or his brothers (Be., Oe.), or reading Dn^nS their
brothers (Ki., Bn., Hogg). — 12*. And the sons of Elpa'al were
'Eber, Misham and Shetned]. This clause appears to have
wrongly come into the text through some transcriber's blunder,
inasmuch as ElpaaVs sons are given below in vv. '^ '•, and the
names of three there are sufficiently similar to these to establish
their identity (("iDtT) "^^^ D^tTD li^ v- ""> "'"ICD'"' C^IT'D l^n
" '•). — 12''. He built Ono and Lod and their dependencies {daugh-
ters)]. The reference is to Elpaal (Zoe., Oe., Hogg). — Ono] mod.
Kefr 'And, some seven miles east and a little south from Jaffa
and five miles north of Lod (in later literature Lydda), mod. Liidd,
which is eleven and three-quarters miles south-east from Jafifa on
the railway to Jerusalem {SWP. H. pp. 251. 267, Baed.< p. 11, cf.
Schiir. Gesch.^ H. p. 183, n. 7,;^). These towns are mentioned in
Vni. 1-28.] GENEALOGY OF BENJAMIN l6l
the OT. only in the writings of the Chronicler and then usually
together as towns inhabited by the children of Benjamin (Ne. ii'^),
and of which sons, with those of Hadid, returned from Babylon
with Zerubbabel (Ezr. 2=' Ne. 7"). The towns themselves, how-
ever, are ancient. Ono occurs in the list of Palestinian towns con-
quered by Thotmes III, and, according to Mariette, Brugsch,
and others, but not W. Max MiAller, Lod also (v. Lydda EBi.).
Their possession by the post-exilic Jews, which is clearly referred
to in this bull ding, seems to have taken place not immediately on
the return of the Jews from Babylon, as might be inferred from the
references (given above) in Ezra and Nehemiah, but at the close
of the Persian and the beginning of the Grecian period, when the
Jews gradually spread out from the territory in the immediate
vicinity of Jerusalem. First in 145 b. c. did the district of Lydda
come into the possession of the Jews through a decree of Demetrius
II (i Mac. II", Meyer, Entst. Jiid. p. 107, Schiir. Gesch.^ I. p. 183).
Hence the inference that this statement is very late (Bn.). The
references to Moab, v. «, and Aijalon, v. ", may refer to similar
colonisations or settlements of Jews. — 13. A^id Beriah and
Shema ] sons of Hiishim; a continuation of the enumeration
of V. " {v. s.). Bert ah, cf. 7" 3o_ Shema (Shim'i v. =') probably
the name of a place 2" '•, a Reubenite 5^ a priest Ne. 8< f. —
These] i.e., Beriah and Shema. — Aijalon] Jos. 19^2 2124 Ju. i^s
et al., the present village of Ydlo, a little to the north of the Jafifa
road, about thirteen miles from Jerusalem {SWP. III. p. 19, Baed.^
p. 93). — These put to flight the inhabitants of Gath]. This state-
ment is entirely obscure. Owing to the common name Beri ah
here and in 7", this route of the men of Gath may be regarded as
connected with the event underlying the narrative of 7'' (Be., Oe.,
Bn. ; this connection is not favoured by Ke., Zoe.). The story of 7^1
looks like the reminiscence of some pre-exilic happening, but since
here we are concerned with late post-exilic families, this sentence
probably arose from a marginal note. — 14. And their brethren*
Shashak f and Jeremoth]. On the emendation and connection of
this verse with the foregoing see v. ". — 15. 16. The six sons of
Beriah. Zebadiah a common name v. " (where perhaps a dittog-
raphy from this verse) 12' 26^ 2 Ch. 178 19" Ezr. 8^ 102°. 'Arad f
II
l62 I CHRONICLES
(name of city Nu. 21' ;iy Jos. 12'^). 'Eder, cf. 23" 24=" (also
name of a city Jos. 15'')- Michael, see 5"^ (Steuernagcl, Ein-
icandening Is. Stdmme, p. 30, reads '7S''3'7iD and connects with
tile clan of Asher of that name, cf. 7^'). Ishpah f. Joha also
II". — 17. 18. The seven (?) sons of Elpa'al. Zebadiah, see v. '\
Meshullam, see 5'', probably Mish'am in v. '2. Hizki-\. Heher
mentioned among the sons of Beri'ah of the tribe of Asher 7",
probably the same as 'Eber v. '2. Ishmerai f probably Shemed
in V. 12, Izli'ah f. Jobab, cf. v. \ otherwise name of Arabic
people Gn. 10", King of Edom Gn. 36'' '-, Canaanitish King
of Madon Jos. ii'. — 19-21. The nine sons of Shime'i ('•yCw', in
V. '3 y:2w'). Jakim also 24'=. Zickri common, vv. "• 2- g>5 26"
2716 2 Ch. i7'6 23' 28' Ne. 11^ 12". Zabdi, three other persons
are mentioned of this name: (i) 27^, (2) Ne. 11'", (3) Jos. 7'.
Eli enai f, but probably the same as the name Elio'enai, occur-
ring as the name of five distinct persons in (i) 3-^ * , (2) 43*,
(3) 7S (4) Ezr. 10" with Ne. 12^', (5) Ezr. 10". ZiUethai, cf. for
another occurrence of the name 12=". £/z'c/, name of eight ad-
ditional persons or families: (i) v. '^-, (2) ^-^, (3) 6" "«), (4, 5)
ii^s- ", (6) 12", (7) 153 with ", (8) 2 Ch. 3i'3. 'Adaiah, seven
other persons or families of this name are mentioned: (i) 6^^ <<'>,
(2) 9'2 Ne. ii'=, (3) 2 Ch. 23', (4) Ezr. 10=', (5) Ezr. lo^', (6)
Ne. 11^ (7) 2 K. 22'. Beraiah f. Shimrath j.— 22-25. The
eleven sons of Shashak. Ishpan f. 'Eber, cf. v. ^^, a common
name: (i) the son of Shelah I's +, (2) a Gadite chief 5'3, (3) a
priest Ne. 12". The tradition of the name is uncertain; Baer
adopts Ebed (1^^), so (g. Eliel, see v. ^o. ' Abdon, also as name
of distinct persons or families: (i) v. 5° 9^^, (2) 2 Ch. 342°, (3) Ju.
j2i3. is^ Zichri, see v. ''. Hanan, common name v. '^ g** ii^^
Ezr. 2<« Ne. 7^^ 8^ lo''- "■ 2? 1313. Hananiah, also a very com-
mon name from the time of Jeremiah onward, see BDB. 'Elam,
a geographical name Gn. 10" et al., that of a Korahite 26', and
of two prominent families in the lists of Ezra and Nehemiah
Ezr. 2' 8' 10'' Ne. 7'= lo'^ and Ezr. 2" Ne. 73* Je. 12^=. The
post -exilic occurrence of the name suggests a connection with
Elam, Persia. This Che}Tie regards as highly improbable and
suggests its origin from an abbreviation 'Alemeth (r\^h]!) or
Vm. 1-28.] GENEALOGY OF BENJAMIN 163
'Almon (pj2^JJ), a Bcnjaminite name {cf. 7' and v. s. v.«) (EBi.
II. col. 1254). ' Anthothijah f, to be associated with the Levit-
ical Benjaminite town Anathoth, Jos. 2i'8 Is. io'« Je. i' et al.; a
personal name 7^ and Ne. 10". Iphdeiah f. Pemi'el (Peni'el Qr.)
cf. 4<. — 26. 27. The six sons of Jeroham (Jeremoih v."). This
name appears in the pedigree of the prophet Samuel i S. i' i Ch.
512. 19 (27. 34) J also as that of five other persons or families: (i)
98- i=, (2) 12', (3) 27", (4) 2 Ch. 23', (5) Ne. 1 1 12. Shamsherai f.
Shehariah f {cf. Sheharain v. »). ' Athaliah, the name of the Queen
of Judah 2 K. ii' « , and of a member of the family of Elam
Ezr. 8". Jaareshiah f. Elijah, besides being the name of the
prophet, is only elsewhere given in the OT. as the name of a
priest, Ezr. lo^', and an Israelite a son of Elam Ezr. 10^% who
had foreign wives. Zichri, cf. v. >". — 28. These were heads of
fathers, i.e., of families, according to their genealogies they were
heads] a reiteration after the manner of P. — These dwelt in
Jerusalem] i.e., all of these families whose heads are enumerated.
This dwelling is clearly meant to be of the time of the Chronicler.
— It is doubtful, however, whether this verse belonged originally
in this context. It agrees verbatim with 9" with the omission of
the words of the Levites (W^^bb) and seems to have come into its
present place along with v. "==9", from c. 9. The subscription
stating that these families dwelt in Jerusalem is contrary to the
tenor of this chapter, which has already placed Elpa al as the
builder of Ono and Lod, and Beri'ah and Shema at Aijalon. The
form of statement In Gibeon dwelt, etc., is parallel to nothing in
c. 8, while in c. 9 it has a parallel in v. \ Hence the inference with
apparent correctness has been drawn that vv. ^s-ss originally stood
in c. 9 and are here an insertion (Mov., Meyer, Entst. Jud. p. 161).
Others have felt that the double record was due to the Chronicler
and appropriate not only here in the list of the Benjaminites but
also in c. 9, as the proper introduction to the narrative of Saul, c. 10
(Be., Ke., Zoe., Ba.). Still again, the original place has been
thought to have been here and its repetition due to the fact that
9' -33 is a supplement to the work of the Chronicler, and after its
insertion a transcriber who had texts before him both with and
without this supplement copied 8^8 «• = 9" «• twice (Bn.) (on
164 1 Chronicles
this theory the omission of 8" ' is difficult) (Ki. regards 9" «• as
already in Chronicles before the supplement c. 8).
29-38. The genealogy of the house of Saul, repeated in
QS6.44 (see V. "). — 29. 31. In Gibe on dwelt the father of Gibeon
Jeuel* and the name of his wife was Mdacah and his first born son
'Abdon then Zur and Kish and Baal and Ner* and Nadab and
Gedor and Ahio and Zecher and Mikloth*]. Gibeon mod. village
of el Jib, five or six miles north of Jerusalem, the seat of a Hebrew
sanctuary i K. 3<- ' et al., and mentioned many times in the OT.
and occurring in connection with the post-exilic history of the
Jews Ne. 3^ 7". Its post-exilic importance, or its association as
the place of the sanctuary 2 Ch. i ^, may have led to its substitu-
tion in the text in place of an original Gibeah, the home of the
family of Saul. Jc'uel, derived from 9" (^S'V\ Qr. ^S'^y).
Ma'acah, name of frequent occurrence cf. 2*^ 3% 'Abdon, cf. v. ".
Zur ("lIV), name of a prince of Midian Nu. 25'= 318 Jos. 13=';
here undoubtedly to be connected with Zeror (Tn^') in Saul's
pedigree, i S. 9". Kish, father of Saul i S. 9' et al. Ba al, perhaps
the original was Abiba'al ('ry^^iS) (cf. Marquart, Fiindamente,
p. 15). It has also been compounded with the following Nadcb
(31J), but the intervening Ner, given in 9^^, also here in (^^, is
against this; yet, at any rate, Baal is probably an abbreviation
(Noeldeke, EBi. Names § 57) . Ner and also Mikloth f (v. 3°), from
their mention in vv. '^ '■, should be inserted as in 9'' '• (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Bn., Ki.). Ner, elsewhere always of the father of
Abner the captain of Saul's host (cf. 1 S. 145" et al.). Gcdor,
as a personal name only here; on place-name cf. 4*. Ahio, as
a personal name cf. 2 S. 6' '•, where We. reads his brother as the
reading in v. ". Dr. prefers there the proper name Ahio
(TS. p. 204). (S^ has his brother here. Zecher f, in 9" Zecha-
riah. — 32. Shimeah ■\] 9'' Shimeam f. — Now these indeed
opposite their brothers dwelt with their brothers in Jerusalem].
This sentence is difficult to understand in its connection. The
usual interpretation has been that these refers to the family of
Mikloth or Shimeah, and that in opposite their brothers the refer-
ence is to Benjaminites dwelling in Gibeon or elsewhere outside of
Jerusalem, while with their brothers refers to fellow tribesmen in
Vm. 29-38.] GENEALOGY OF SAUL 165
Jerusalem (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.)- The emphasis certainly is on
the dwelling in Jerusalem. Ki. regards the words as a late gloss.
Ba. suggests "The heading of a list which has been lost." Bn.
brings to a close here a paragraph of Benjaminite families in
Gibeon of the period of the Chronicler. Vv. "-'s giving the line of
Saul, he regards as of doubtful origin, although probably from the
Chronicler and with its heading, which should correspond to i S.
9', missing. Hogg, after finding in vv. «-" the descendants of the
clan of Gera, sees in vv. ^"-^^ the descendants of Becher, "the only
other Benjaminite clan known to history." He reads "»i;Di ""J^l
"And the sons of Bichri were Abdon, etc." V. " he connects with
v. " as a part of an element having arisen in its present form
from its original place in c. 9. — 33. And Ner begat Abner*]
(Be., Oe., Kau., Ki., Bn.). (M Kish. also 9".) Abner is clearly
the true reading, since in 9''' {v. also v. ") Ner and Kish are
apparently brothers, and in i S. 9' Kish is the son of Abiel, and in
I S. 14^' both Ner and Kish are sons of Abiel, according to the
reading now generally adopted (see Sm. Com. in loco) (Ke. re-
tained Kish, regarding the Ner here mentioned as "the progenitor
of the line from which Saul was descended "). Zoe. gives the same
view, but thinks owing to the prominence of Abner originally there
was in the text, "And Ner begat Abner and Kish begat Saul." —
Jonathan and Malchi-shna are given among Saul's sons in i S.
14^', where also Eshbaal (^yatr« = ^V3ty''S) is to be found in
Ishvi ("'ID"' = 1"'wi>*, T* = ^!"l^^ having been substituted for h]!2)
(see Sm. Com. in loco). Elsewhere Eshbaal or Ishbaal appears
in I and 2 S. as Ishbosheth (nDnt:'"'S Bosheth "shame" tak-
ing the place of Baal). These changes were made to avoid the
abhorred name Baal and such recensions seem to have been made
at a later date than the composition of i Ch. (r/. Ashbel v. ').
Abinadab probably belongs also to the original text of i S. 14^',
since Jonathan, Alalchi-shua, and Abinadab are mentioned as slain
with their father on Mt. Gilboa (i S. 31' i Ch. io=). — 34. Alerib-
ba'al f ] 9<»^ (^yn T^t2), in g*'>^ Meri-baal (^j;^ """ID). The former
gives the meaning "Baal contends," and is preferred by Nestle
{Eigennamen, p. 121) and Noeldeke (EBi. Names, § 42), the latter
supported by (^ in 8" Mepi^aaX, "Hero of Baal," by Bn., Ki.
l66 I CHRONICLES
(SBOT.), Gray (HPN. p. 201), and Kerber {Hebrdischen Ei-
gennamen, pp. 45/.)- In 2 S. 4' 9^ d al., this son of Jonathan is
called Mephibosheth (nw3'^3?2)- Boshcth is a substitution for
Baal (v. s.), while Mephi (""BD) is probably a corruption of
Meri (''"ID). This latter already appears in (^^, here and 9^", in
M€fi(f)L/3aaX. — Alicah] frequent personal name, cf. 5^—35.
Filho>i-\]. — Melech-\] "king" probably with reference to deity,
and like Baal an abbreviation. (^® has M.e\')(^Tj\, L MaX^j^fT^X
ibi<*''2b^).—Tarea'] (yiSn) f Tahrca f ^'\—Ahaz] besides the
King of Judah, as a personal name only here. — 36. Jehdaddah]
{rn]^^n^) ti J^'rah (nnV) 9'' ■\.—'Alemeth]. Cf. JK—Azma-
veth] (niDTV, Ki. SBOT. niOTj;) "Death is strong," occurs
also as the name of one of David's heroes ii^s 2 S. 23'', and of
one of his officers 27^^, and as either a family or place name in
12', and that of a place, mod. HizmeJi, four miles north-east of
Jerusalem, hence of Benjamin, Ezr. 2-^ Ne. 12^9 with Beth Ne.
7=«. — Zimri] name of King of Israel i K. 16' ei al., of the prince of
Simeon Nu. 25", cf. also 2^. — Moza], the name elsewhere only
2^\ — 37. Bin a |]. — Raphah]. Cf. for occurrence of name else-
where 20'' 2 S. 21'^ Raphiah 9", cf. for occurrence of name 3='
4" 7= Ne. 3'. — £/'a5a/i] name not infrequent, (i) 2^9, (2) Je. 29', (3)
Ezr. 10". — Azel or Azal f (unless Zee. 14^)]. — 38. Azrikam his
first horii^\ (|, ^, have 1"l23 his first bom instead of iJI *1"132
Bocheru, which latter reading has clearly arisen from the falling of
one of the six sons from the text and thus supplies the deficiency.
The absence of the connective before 1133 shows also that the
word originally was first bom. Some mss. of (g {cf. Holmes) supply
a son Ao-a at the close (but not (§^^^). # divides the name 'Azri-
kam into >A9}i» and >q-»-3. — Ishma'el] occurs frequently as a proper
name in the late Hebrew and Jewish period, (i) Je. 40' ^■, (2) 2 Ch.
19", (3) 23', (4) Ezr. 10--. — Sheariah |]. — ^'O&a^/ia/z] frequent name.
— Hanan] see v. =2. — The names in w. '^-^^ of the descendants of
Saul are clearly designed to be personal, and since no necessarily
late names appear among them and since they are free from
repetitions such as appear in the artificial genealogies of the
priests and Levites (cf. 5'" "• (6^ ^■) 6' ^- '-^ ^■'>), there is no reason
to doubt their genuineness (Gray, HPN. p. 241). Twelve genera-
IX. 1-34.] INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM 1 67
tions from Saul are given, which would bring the record down to
near the period of the exile.
39. 40. Not given in c. g.— Eshek-\ his brother] i.e., the brother
of Azel (Be., Ke.), if the verse has its right context.— t//am] only
here and 7'^ — Jeiish] see 7'". — Eliphelet] name of son of David 3*
14' and two persons mentioned in Ezr. 8'' 10". — Bow men]. Cf.
2 Ch. 14'. — One hundred andjifty]. This number fits in well with
those given of families in Ezr. 2' «-. — These verses may be taken
as a fragment without close connection with the foregoing (Bn.)
or following directly on v. " (Meyer, Entst. Jud. p. 161, Hogg).
Hogg reads Shiia (yr^) or perhaps Shu'al (^j;!:^) in place of
'Eshek (pl^'y) and finds thus a continuation of a line of descent
from Gera v. ^ Then, of course, his brother refers to the con-
nection with Ehud v. K
IX. 1-34. The inhabitants of Jerusalem. — This section
in vv. '-"• "" has marked affinity with Ne. 11 3-". Both
passages enumerate the inhabitants of Jerusalem on the same
general plan, with striking coincidences in the names of the
residents.
(i) The children of Judah according to the clans of Perez, Shelah
(v. i.), and Zerah, with representatives of the same name for the first
two, since 'Uthai (v^U") (v. ■") is equivalent to 'Athaiah (n-ry) (ii''),
and 'Asaiah (n^f;') (v. 0 to Ma'asiah (nv^-yr:) (ns). (2) The chil-
dren of Benjamin, with Sallu son of Meshullam in each (v. ' 11'). (3)
The priests with Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, Jachin in each (v.'" ii'°), 'Azariah
(jy^'vy) equivalent plainly to Seraiah (i^nr), since their pedigrees are
the same, i.e., the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok,
the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahituh, the ruler of the house of God (v. "
1 1"), and ' Adaiah, the son of Jeroham with the same names Pashhiir and
MalchVjah in his pedigree (v. '^ 1112) and Ma'asai the son of'Adiel the
son of Jahzerah . . . the son of Meshillemith the son of I miner
(.T'cSi'D p . . . n-iTm p Ss'ij? p >tt'>"n) (v. '-), equivalent to " Amashsai
the son of 'Azarel the son of Ahzai the son of Meshillemoth the son of
Immer " (ninSa'D p 'rnx p Sx-iry p ■<DZ'::y) (11''). (4) The Levites with
Shemaiah the son of Hashshuh the son of 'Azrikam the son of Hashabiah
and Mattaniah the son of Mica the son of Zikri (or Zabdi) the son of
Asaph and 'Obadiah (Abda) the son of Shema'iah (Shammua) the son
of Galal the son of Judulhun in each (vv. '^^'^ ii'^- i^). (5) The
gate-keepers with 'Akkuh and Talmon in each (v. " 11'').
l68 I CHRONICLES
These similarities have found an explanation in the continuity
of the families of Jerusalem before and after the exile, our chapter
giving the former, and Ne. ii the latter (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). Such
actual continuity with its preservation in records can hardly be
seriously maintained, although it probably was the notion of who-
ever gave this chapter its place in i Ch. (Bn., Smd. List. p. 7,
Meyer, Ejitst. Jud. p. loi). This writer is usually regarded as the
Chronicler, but since the Chronicler has treated other matters in
cc. 1-8, and since he systematically considers the duties of the
Levites and gate-keepers (vv. '''s) in 261^ « , it has been held
that this chapter is an interpolation (so Bn.). Its author seems to
have taken a register of post-exilic inhabitants and given it a place
here on the supposition that this register represented also pre-
exilic conditions (Smd. List. p. 7, Bn.). The chapter seems re-
lated to Ne. II, through their both having a common source (Be.,
Smd., Ba., Bn., Ki.), and the differences between them may be due
to changed conditions of population in Jerusalem — Ne. 11 repre-
senting those of the time of Nehemiah and our chapter those of
the time of the Chronicler (Ki.). Both chapters are regarded by
Meyer {Entst. Jud. pp. 189 /.) as free fancies of the Chronicler
without historical worth. This is possible.
In favor of the Chronicler's composition of this chapter may be
alleged the fact that the Chronicler in the preceding chapters with
few exceptions deals with the dwelling-places of the tribes. The
city of Jerusalem could not well have been overlooked, it is argued,
and yet could not be assigned to any one tribe, hence the list of
inhabitants from three tribes, Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.
(The words in v. ', And of the children of Ephraim and Manasseh,
are wanting in Ne. 11, and since none such are enumerated in the
following verses, are probably a gloss. Yet v. i.) (For further
points on introduction v. i. vv. - ^•.)
1. And all Israel was registered]. This sentence appears like
a reference to the foregoing genealogies of i Ch. and has been so
taken (Ke., Zoe., Oe.), but the following statement, "behold they
are written, etc.,'' rather implies that v. ■ is an independent intro-
duction to this section (Be.) from the hand of the interpolator
(Bn.). All Israel is not the ten tribes taken in contrast to Judah
IX. 1-34.] INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM 169
(Be.) but either all the tribes in general (Ke., Zoe., Bn.), or better,
Judah and the elements which adhered to the S. kingdom after
722 B. c. (Ki.). — llie Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah]
thus (g, "H, Meyer, Entst. Jnd. p. 100; "The Book of the Kings of
Israel" M, AV., RV., Zoe., Kau., Ki., and generally. Judah,
then, according to this latter rendering, is the subject of the follow-
ing verb and the next clause reads "and Judah was carried away
captive, etc." On this "Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah"
cf. 2 Ch. 27'' 35" 368, where it is mentioned in connection with
Jotham, Josiah, and Jehoiakim {v. Intro, pp. 21 ff.). Here the
reader is referred to this work for the registration of all Israel,
while the writer confines himself to that of the inhabitants of
Jerusalem. — They were carried away, etc.]. This can refer only
to all Israel as represented in Judah. The subject need not be
Judah of the text, but can readily be supplied. The sentence serves
as an introduction to the following enumeration, since the cap-
tivity had become the dividing point in historical reckoning. —
2. A modification of Ne. 1 1^ — First]i.e., chief, after the suggestion
of Ne. II', "And these are the chief men of the province who
dwelt in Jerusalem " 0:1 -]^-:0 ty«n H^'K), and the list vv. * «• is
taken as that of chief men (Ba.); or the first after the return from
the captivity, i.e., the inhabitants of the land in the first century
after the restoration {cf use of jtrSI in Ne. 5'^ 7^) (Be.); but the
position of this chapter shows that the writer designed to give pre-
exilic inhabitants and it is better to take first with that force (Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Meyer, Bn., Ki.). — In their possessions and their cities].
These words are almost meaningless here. They can only signify
that the inhabitants of the land generally were divided into the
four following classes. They are an abridgment of " In cities of Ju-
dah dwelt each one in his own possession in their cities" (Ne. ii'),
where the point is that those enumerated in the following verses
as inhabitants of Jerusalem formerly resided outside of the city
in which they had now chosen of their own free will to dwell
(Ne. 1 1 2). — Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim].
These words also are taken from Ne. 11', from which "and the
sons of Solomon" has been omitted, possibly because at this time
this designation had ceased, "sons of Solomon" being compre-
170
I CHRONICLES
hended under the Nethinim. Israel, i.e., laymen not of Levitical
descent (cf. Ezr. 2'° 10* et al.). The Nethinim, Temple servants
reckoned as inferior to the Levites, akhough later probably amalga-
mated with them. They are only mentioned here and in Ezr.
248. 68. 70 ^7 gi7. 20 '^Q_ T^i. 31 y46. 60. 73 jQ"' "" ii'' ^'. Thcy probablv
were of Canaanitish origin — most likely to be connected with the
Gibeonites (Jos. 9") and the foreigners mentioned in Ez. 44'.
— 3. And in Jerusalem divelt certain of the children of Judah and
certain of the children of Benjamin]. These words appear also
in Ne. ii^ — And certain of the children of Ephraim and Manas-
seh]. These words apparently have been added to this post-exilic
register to make it fit pre-e.xilic conditions. According to the
Chronicler, members of Ephraim and Manasseh adhered to the
S. kingdom (2 Ch. 28' 30"- '« 34')- They are not, however, men-
tioned by him in connection with the restoration.
4-6. The sons of Judah. — 4. Ne. u'^ begins with "From the
sons of Judah," which may be supplied as the heading of this
verse (Ki.) or the equivalent of this heading may be seen in the
son of Judah, with which the verse ends and which is not found in
Nehemiah.— ^///ai f] 'Athaiah Ne. iV f (v. s.). The names,
whichever is original, are obscure and of uncertain meaning. —
'Ammihud]. Cf y^K—Otnri]. Cf. JK—Imri] Ne. s^1[.—Bani].
Cf. 6", a frequent name in Ezr.-Ne. — This line of descent is
entirely obscure and different from the one given in Ne. ii^ —
Perez]. The most conspicuous clan of Judah {cf. 2'- «). — 5. The
Shilonites] ('':^*'tt*n Ne. 11= '•l^'wTl) correspond with the Shela-
nites Ci^w'n) given in Nu. 26" as the family or clan from Shelah
the son of Judah, cf. 4^K—Asaiah]. Cf. 4'' Ma'asaiah Ne. 11^
{v. s.), whose line of descent through six ancestors from "the
Shilonite" is given.— 6. Zerah]. Cf 2' the third clan of Judah.
—Jeuel]. Cf. g'. Not given in Ne., where the corresponding
verse (11'') reads "and all the sons of Perez," the last word an
error for Zerah (Meyer, EntsL Jud. p. 187, Txote).—Six hundred
and ninety] in Ne. ii« the number is "468 men of strength," i.e.,
capable of military service. The larger number may indicate the
increase of population of this clan at the time when this chapter
was written.
IX. 1-34.] INHABIT.\NTS OF JERUSALEM 171
7-9. The sons of Benjamin. — 7. Sallu the son of Meshnllam]
given also in Ne. n' t> but with a decidedly different pedigree.
It is not improbable that "son of Hodaviah son of Hassenuah"
(nS'^Dn p ""••"in ]2) is a corruption or derivation of "Judah
son of Hassenuah" (nS'lJlDH p m'n^) Ne. 11' in^^^^n and
min'' are confused in Ezr. 2'" and 3^), and hence the pedigree
of this Sallu son of Meshnllam has here been entirely omitted. —
8. Ibneiah f] has been seen in "Gabbai" or "Gabbai Sallai" of
Ne. 11^ — The other heads here mentioned, Elah and Meshnllam,
are without correspondences in Ne. — 9. The number in Ne. is
928.
10-13. The priests. — Here the correspondence with Ne. is
very exact (v. s.). The material, however, is given more com-
pactly, since only one enumeration is given v. ■', cf. Ne. 11 '2- '^ ><.
Six priestly families are mentioned, Jeda'iah, Jehoiarib, and
Jachin, v. '», without pedigrees, apparently because these three
names appear among the priestly families who received courses or
appointments for service in the Temple at the time of David:
Jeda'iah, the second course 24'; Jehoiarib, the first 24^; Jachin,
the twenty-first 24'^ Jeda'iah also appears as a family name in the
list of the priests who returned with Zerubbabel Ezr. 2'« Ne.
7", and as the name of two chiefs of the priests of the same period
Ne. 12^ f-. Jehoiarib or Joiarib (Ne. 1 1'°) is the name of a priestly
house of the days of Joiakim whose head was Mattenai Ne. 12",
and from which the Maccabees were descended (i Mac. 2').
Persons of this name also are mentioned among the priests who
went up with Zerubbabel Ne. 1 2«, and with Ezra Ezr. 8". 'Adaiah
and Ma'asiah {v. s.) v. '= belong most likely to the same category
as the other three families, since, while not names of priestly houses
mentioned in 24' -'s, the former is given as a descendant of Malchi-
jah, who held the fifth priestly course (24='), and the latter from
Immer, who held the sixteenth (24'^). ' Azariah v. ", for which we
should read Seraiah, after Ne. 11", probably represents a similar
priestly family that appears among the list of the priestly families
of the time of Joiakim Ne. 12'^. A priest of the same name is
given in Ne. 12' among those who returned with Zerubbabel.
The genealogy of Seraiah, however, is that of the high priest
172 I CHRONICLES
Seraiah, the father of Jehozadak, who went into captivity, with the
variation of MeshuUum for Shallum and the insertion of Meraioth.
Cf. 5" "• (6'2 H ). While it is possible that this is the true genealogy
of this Seraiah and that he represents the high priest's family, the
view is plausible that this genealogy has arisen through the gloss
of some one who identified Seraiah with the high priest of that
name (Bn.). ' Azariah most likely came into the text from " Azariah
the father of Seraiah" (5^" (6")). The rider of the house of God
may refer either to A hitiib or 'Azariah (Seraiah). This latter mav
have arisen from 2 Ch. 31 '3, where Azariah of the reign of Hezekiah
is given that office, or it may describe an actual ofhce of the time
of this record. This office may not mean that of the high priest,
since in 2 Ch. 31s several such rulers are mentioned. The sum
of the numbers of these priestly families given in v. i' is 1,760,
while in Ne. ii'- 13, u -^yg have 822, 242, and 128, a total of 1,192.
V. " not only contains this single summary but groups together
phrases found scattered in Ne. 11. And their brethren the heads
of their fathers' houses has its correspondence in 11''^ ' ; mighty men
of valor, in ii'^; the work of the service of the house of God, in 11 '2.
In addition to the names given here, Ne. 11" mentions an overseer,
"Zabdiel the son of Haggedolim."
14-16. The Levites. — 14. 6'/zew(/'w/i appears in Ne. ii'^with
the same pedigree except that instead of closing with //-«;» the sons
of Merari O-nO ''J2 p) the line closes with "son of Buni"
{'^y\2 \2)- This latter may have arisen from the former (Be.).
The name is frequent and given in connection with the Merarite
Juduthun in v. '« and 2 .Ch. 29". (Ne. 1 1 '« has no parallel in our
passage.) — 15. Bakbakkar f ] is a strange name, perhaps the same
as Bakbukiah Ne. ii'7. — Heresh f and Galal] are wanting in
Ne. II. — Mattaniah, etc.] in Ne. ii'" {v. s.) is styled "the chief
to begin the thanksgiving in prayer," RV. The text probably is
corrupt (see Mattaniah, EBi.).—l^. 'Obadiah] (v. s.).—And
Berechiah son of Asa the son of Elkanah who dwelt in the villages
of the Netophathites] entirely wanting in Ne. 1 1 ; appears like a
marginal gloss added by some one to complete the list of Levitical
singers rather than the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Elkanah
represents the family of Heman, the Kehathite, otherwise not
IX. 1-34.] INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM 173
represented here (r/. 6'8 <">) . The villages of the Netophathites are
mentioned in Ne. 1228 as the residences of "the singers." Netopha
has been identified with ''Umm Toba," north of Bethlehem
{SWP. III. p. 52), or Beit Nettif, about twelve miles west of Bethle-
hem (Rob. BR. II. pp. 16/., rejected by Bn., Baed.^ p. 124). The
number of the Levites (in Ne. ii'^ 284) is entirely omitted. This
list of the Levites is principally that of the guilds of singers.
17-34. The gate-keepers and their duties. — In this section
only w. •'• "'^ are paralleled in Ne. 11 and the remainder is a
further description of the personnel and duties of the gate-keepers
of the Temple and possibly of some additional Levites. The
statements, however, are somewhat contradictory and confused.
Conditions of the writer's own time v. ■*% of the Davidic period
V. ", and of the Mosaic period are not sharply distinguished. Like-
wise the status of the gate-keepers is not definitely outlined. They
are introduced as though distinct from the Levites (v. i' compared
with v. '^), and yet they are called Levites (w. ''• ^e). Their office
goes back to the Mosaic period (vv. 19 f ), and yet David and
Samuel are said to have ordained them in their office (v. 2=).
They appear in the list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem and yet
they, or at least a portion of them, are given residence in villages
outside of the city (vv. =2. 25), j^ the description of their duties
the writer passes at once, without any indication of the fact, in
v. «" (Be., Ke., Oe., Zoe., Bn., Ki.), or in v. "^ (Ba., ARV.), to the
duties of the Levites in general. And finally in v. ^^ the statement
is made that these are the singers and in v. ^^ we have a subscription
apparently of an altogether different paragraph, i.e., a list of the
chief men of the Levites who dwelt at Jerusalem. A partial solu-
tion of these difficulties may be found in the following considera-
tions: (i) The gate-keepers, probably in the earliest post-exilic
period, were regarded as distinct from the Levites, and this distinc-
tion was made in the first list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
reflected in w. "■ '' Ne. ii'^- 19, but later they, or at least the chief
gate-keepers, were reckoned as Levites (\'v. 19 f- 26 c. 26). (2) The
tradition respecting their origin may have been this: first, that
along with the other officials of the Temple they were instituted
by David and Samuel (v. " cf. 16^^ 26' «■), and then, secondly, that
174 I CHRONICLES
this institution applied only to the subordinate gate-keepers who
resided in the country (vv. "• 25)^ while the chief gale-keepers who
resided in Jerusalem (v. ") traced their ofhce to the Mosaic period
(vv. '^ '■). (3) The abrupt transition of subject may be due to
corruptions of the text or the omission of verses originally written
(v. i.).
17. Shallum, Akkub and Talmon] are among the six fami-
lies of gate-keepers who returned with Zerubbabel according to
Ezr. 2<2. Shallum does not appear in Ne. 11", probably through
a copyist's oversight. He is mentioned with the others in Ne. 1225
under the name MeshuUam (see also v. "). — Ahiman] (JI^TIS)
wanting in Ne., and elsewhere only the name of a son of an Anakite
Nu. 13" Jos. 15" Ju. 1'° f, is suspicious and may have arisen from
the following their brethren (DHTiN) (Ba.), written perhaps to
take the place of Ater, which may have been dropped from the
original text, since four names are needed (cf. Ezr. 2^2 ^nd lo^^,
where Ater ("lt2S) may have been corrupted into Uri ("'I'lhs*)).
Or this fourth name, Ahiman, may have been coined to meet the
requirement of v. ", the original document of the inhabitants of
Jerusalem having only three names. — 18. And up to this time].
The reference is to the period of the writer, i.e., of the Chronicler
(Ki.), or of his interpolator (Bn.). At that time Shallum was
stationed in the king's gate on the east side of the Temple area.
The eastern gate of the court of Solomon's Temple may have been
called the king's gate and the ancient name may have been pre-
served in the second Temple; or this name, since the natural en-
trance for the King would have been directly from the palace on
the south, may have been derived from Ezekiel's temple, in which
the royal entrance is placed on the east (Ez. 46' ^■).— Of the camp of
the sons of Levi] that is, the Temple with its chambers and courts,
an expression derived from Nu. 2", and paralleled in the "camp
of Yahweh" 2 Ch. 31 2, and doubtless used to indicate that the
families of the gate-keepers (v. '') already at the time of Moses were
"in office" {cf. v. ^^^). — 19. Shallwn] clearly the same as the Shal-
lum of V. »', and identical with Meshelemiah 26', Shelemiah 26". —
Keepers of the thresholds], i.e., gate-keepers. Cf. for the use of
this term 2 Ch. 34' 2 K. 121" <'> 23* 25" Je. 35^. — Of the tent] i.e.,
IX. 1-34.] INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM 175
either of the tabernacle or the Temple; the term could apply to
either (see v. ") and probably was used with that intent; or the
writer may have meant David's tent (2 S. 6") (Zoe., Oe.). — Ajid
their fathers were over the camp of Yahweh keepers of the entrance].
There is no record of this in P, but since the Korahites were
given descent from Kehath (Ex. 6'8 ^i)^ ^nd since the Kehathites
held the first place among the servants of the holy place and were
responsible for the holiest vessels (Nu. 4* '^■), this tradition could
easily have arisen. The camp of Yahweh is the tabernacle, and
the entrance is the entrance into the court of the tabernacle (Ke.),
or the reference is to the camp of Israel and its entrance (Ba.).
The former, the more usual explanation, is to be preferred. — 20.
And Ph'mehas the son of Ele azar was rider over them in time past].
This tradition may have arisen from Nu. 25" "^ , where in v. « is
mentioned the "door of the tent of meeting" where all the congre-
gation of Israel were gathered, and in v. ', "Phinehas arose from
the midst of the congregation and took a spear in his hand," as
though he were an officer there on duty, in command of the keep-
ers of the gate. — May Yahweh be with him!] an instance of the
Jewish and Oriental custom of uttering a pious wish when men-
tioning the name of a distinguished righteous dead person. —
21. Zechariah, etc.] a continuation of the glorification of Shall um
V. 19, since (identifying Shallum with Meshelemiah and Shelemiah)
(26=- '^) Zechariah was his son. Zechariah clearly was a man of
prominence in the priestly traditions, " a discreet counsellor "
(26''). In connection with w. " f. ike tent of meeting must be
understood as the tabernacle at Gibeon (Bn., Ki.) or the tent
for the ark during the time of David, while as a continuation
of w. '9 '■ clearly the Mosaic tent is meant (Bn.). Vv. i8b-2i are
parenthetical and probably a gloss, since by making the gate-
keepers' office an institution of the Mosaic period they appar-
ently contradict the statement of v. "^ where David and Samuel
are its founders (Bn., Ki.) (yet v. s.). — 22. All of them who were
chosen for gate-keepers at the thresholds were 212]. This state-
ment is a continuation of v. '^a, q- jv^g. ii'', where the number
is 172. — They were reckoned by genealogies in their villages].
The emphasis is on the final phrase in anticipation of v. ", —
176 I CHRONICLES
David and Samii'el the seer established them in their office of
trust]. This statement respecting the work of David is agree-
able to the Chronicler's view of his having organised the personnel
of the sanctuary, priests 24', Levites 23" 24=', singers 25' "■,
gate-keepers 16'' and implicitly in 26' °-. Saviu'el is called the
seer after i S. 9', also so called in 26^8 29", likewise Hanani 2 Ch.
i6'- ". This is the only record of Samuel's participation in ar-
rangements for the sanctuary and it is a good example of Jewish
Midrash. Historically, his activity could only have been in con-
nection with the tabernacle placed by the Chronicler at Gibeon
(16" 2 Ch. i3), since he died before the death of Saul, and hence
before the reign of David. — 23. They and their children were at
the gates of the house of Yahiveh, the tent-house, for guards]. This
statement refers to the families of gate-keepers living in Jerusalem.
The two expressions, the house of Yahweh and the house of the
tent, seem used to cover both the case of the Temple and the period
of David before the Temple was built. The second expression
then either refers to the tent of the ark on Mt. Zion {cf. 16") or
the tabernacle at Gibeon ; or the writer may not have distinguished
between them. This last is most likely. For guards, i.e., guardi-
ans of the gates, cf. Ne. 7^ — 24. Cf. the arrangement of the gate-
keepers in 26'^ « . — 25. And their brethren who were in their vil-
lages were obliged to come ercery seven days, from time to time, to
be with these]. No mention elsewhere is made of the gate-keepers
dwelling in villages. The singers, however, did so (see v. ■«).
These, i.e., the gate-keepers mentioned in v. "■'. — 26. For the
four chief {heroes of) gate-keepers were in continual office (trust)]
i.e., they did not rotate from time to time as the under gate-
keepers. The four clearly represented the four families of v. '"\
— They are the Levites]. From this it would seem that the imder
gate-keepers who resided in the villages were not yet reckoned as
Levites. The \\Titer possibly has meant to distinguish two classes
of gate-keepers: first those of the four families of v. ", who traced
their office to the time of Moses, were acknowledged of Levitical
descent, resided in Jerusalem, and whose representatives held the
continual office of chief gate-keepers and whose duties are de-
scribed in vv. "i" '■; secondly the under gate-keepers, who resided
K. 1-34.] INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM 177
out of Jerusalem, traced their office to David and Samuel, and
performed their duties at stated intervals, and were not reckoned
as Levites {v. s.). — And they were over the chambers and the
treasuries of the'house of God]. These words either introduce a
new paragraph speaking of the duties of the Levites in general
and not of the gate-keepers (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki.)
or the four chief gate-keepers are still the subject (H, EVs., Ba.).
In 26-° ^-j after the enumeration of the gate-keepers, a list of in-
dividual Levites who were over the treasuries is given. Chambers,
store-chambers in which tithes and sacred vessels were kept.
Cf. 2 Ch. 315- !■• '2 Ne. i3<-9. These were both a part of the
Temple itself (judging from the plan of Solomon's and Ezekiel's
Temples, see DB. and EBi.), and possibly separate buildings in
the courts (26'^) (Bn.). Very little, however, is known of Zerub-
babel's Temple. — 27. They lodged round about the house of God,
for upon them rested the duty of watching, and they had charge
of opening {the temple) every morning]. The subject is either
the Levites who had charge of the stores of the Temple and
hence were required to guard them with care day and night, or,
as the last clause suggests, the principal gate-keepers. Open-
ing (nnSD) may also be rendered key, as elsewhere Ju. 3-5 Is.
22=2 -j-^ hence they were over the key, i.e., it was incumbent upon
them to open the storehouses every morning (Be.). — 28. And
some of them had charge of the utensils of service]. Probably the
more costly traditional gold and silver utensils (28" ^- Dn. i^
52 "■) are here referred to, since they were to be accurately counted.
— 29. The holy utensils] from the connection would appear to
have been those used in the offerings of the products of the soil.
■ — 30. A statement suggested by the last word of v. "; perhaps
a gloss (Bn., Ki.). Its motive is to show the limitation of the
work of the Levites in connection with the spices. On the work,
cf. Ex. 3022-38, — 31. Shalhim] is the family name and Mattithiah
the first born represents a different period of time from that in
which Zechariah was the first born (cf. vv. '»• 21 262). The name
Mattithiah is frequent i$'^- 21 16^ 253- 21 Ezr. 10" Ne. 8^f, but
none of its bearers can be identified with this person. — In the
office of trust over the pastry of flat cakes]. Cf. Lv. 2' ^- 6' «■ "* «•>
12
178 I CHRONICLES
7'i «•, etc. — 32. KehalJiiles]. One of the three great divisions of
the Levites, cf. Nu. 3"- '"■ ". — J^heir brethren] with reference to
tlie Levites mentioned in v. ='. For the way of arranging the
show-bread, see Lv. 24^ « . — 33. A subscription out of place, since
the singers are not mentioned in the immediately foregoing verses.
It either was written in reference to vv. '^-i«, which relate princi-
pally of singers (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.), or it closed a list of sing-
ers who dwelt in the Temple chambers and were freed from other
service (□''"I'ltaS r\y^b'2), which has been omitted from the text
(Bn., Ki.). — For day and night they were in their work] the
reason why they were freed from other service. On peculiar
sentence v. i. — 34. Another subscription, either going with v. " re-
ferring to all the Levites mentioned in w. 1°'^, or it is a repetition
of 8^8 and has come in here with vv. "■■'< and has been adjusted
to the context by the insertion of the Levites, see S^s.
4, A comparison with N^. 11* suggests that several names have
dropped from this line, thus:
Ne. 11^ v-13 1J3D Sn'SShd p niL30B> p r\-'-\^n p nnj? p n>?j? p n^ny.
I Ch. 94 \-\Q 1J3 ]D 'ja ta n::N p "ncj? p nin^j? p ip^.
— ncN] wanting in (B», since the transliteration would be the same as
that for n:r>', cf. (6k — 5. ''jSi^n] Ne. ii^ ^i'?^r\, read with Nu. 2620
••tl'^^}, so Be., Ke., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki. — -njan r^-^ivy] the first-born
appears wrong when none of Asaiah's brothers are given. (& read 1133,
which is certainly wrong as far as the suffix is concerned (after jc
''jSa'n). Possibly the original was ina p ni^-y cf. ina p riTyc Ne. 11'.
— 10. 3n>inii] Ne. 11'" incorrectly '' p. — 11. nnryi] Ne. ii" ni-ic\
— 12. DnT" p] Ne. ii'^-f- nnDt p ixns p n^SSo p. — p V^ny p ''V•$•c^
dS'.:'D p min^] Ne. ii'^ nnN p Sniij? p iD^'Dyi. — nicSsfD] Ne. n'l — ,
so ^.—13 presents in iM a long series of constructs (Dav. Syn. § 26).
Probably, however, before honSs a S from the influence of the final
letter of 'jip has fallen from the text (Ges. § 128c), or according to
Ne. ii'2 an ^sry has been omitted {cf. 232*). — 15. Since cnn has no 1 pre-
fixed, V\ read v-\n carpentarius. Instead of SSji v\t\ Cheyne reads
nSnnn csn, "the leader in the song of praise," and places after Mat-
taniah . . . son of Asaph (EBi. ii. col. 2019). — noi] some mss., Ne.
11" -iiai. — 16. n^yi^tt^ p nnajJi] Ne. jnDU' p Niayi. — ndn] 32 mss. ']Vt<,
read M. — 18. Pi:nr:] pi. Ges. § 124b or e. — 20b. mj; nin>] (S /cai
oBroi ^leT' auroO, & oCaci* l^j^o, H coram Domino, AV., RV.
"And the Lord was with him." — 22. nnn 1 ^nd 5] an accusative of
the obj. Ges. § 125a f.n. — 23. nncB'DS] /or guards, cf. Ne. 7', BDB.
rx. 35-44.] GENEALOGY OF SAUL 1 79
mo"'??, I. — 25. Nn'^] inf. with S of past time with implied injunc-
tion, Dr. TH. § 204, Ges. § 114^. — D^'cn rya::''^] definite, regular,
and expected, since present to the mind, see Ges. §§ 134W, 126^.
— 26. 7\r:n] Dr. TH. § 201 (i). — 3''i'^n on] an independent clause clos-
ing a section (Kau., Ki. Kom. Das sind die Leviten). (& omits on
and 1 (before ■•.■") and connects with the following. Ke. (followed by
Zoe. and Ki. SBOT., and BH. doubtfully) also connects with the
following and suggests that the original text for rni o^'^n oni was ]'^2^
vn a^iSn. — 27. For cni Be. reads an-:i. — 33. HDs'^sa ar^-hy n^^'^i ddv ••d]
Rterally, by day and by night there was upon them in the work, i.e., they
were busy day and night in their work. The clause is peculiar both
in having no subject expressed and in the peculiar force of 3 with
the noun. Cf. 1. 117 a, Ew. § 295 e, BDB. a V. note.
35-44. The genealogy of Saul.— A duplicate of S-^-^' (see
pp. 164-7).
X-XXIX. THE HISTORY OF DAVID.
This history of David falls into two parts: (i) x-xx contain-
ing an account of his reign; (2) xxi-xxix preparations for the
building of the Temple and the orders and arrangements of the
servants of the Temple, (xxi serves as connecting link between
the two sections, since it could be appropriately classed with
either.)
X. The death of Saul. — The entire connection of David with
Saul is passed over and the Chronicler begins his history of David
with an account of the death of Saul taken from i S. 31'", with a
few slight variations due partly to intention, partly to accident, and
in some instances preserving a better text than the present ^ of
I S.
1. The narrative of the battle of Mt. Gilboa is introduced ab-
ruptly, the Chronicler taking for granted that the events which led
to it were well known to the reader. The introductory clause
Now the Philistines fought against Israel is a general statement
which was conveniently supplied by the source. In i S. it serves
to reintroduce the main theme after a digression concerning
David's attack upon the Amalekites. — Each man of Israel fled]
implying that the defeat turned into a panic in which each man
cared for his own life. This has been substituted by the Chron-
icler for the more general statement in i S. "and the men of
Israel fled," and was doubtless intentional to make the account of
the defeat more vivid. — And Jell down slain in mount Gilboa].
According to i S. 28^, the Philistines were encamped at Shunem
(the mod. Sdlam) and the Israelites were gathered together on Mt.
Gilboa (the mod. Jehel Fuku'a). This ridge commands the en-
trance to the southern angle of the Plain of Esdraelon through
Dothan, and also the main highway from Esdraelon to the Jordan,
180
X. 1-14.] DEATH OF SAUL l8l
viz., that through the Valley of Jezreel. It was,'therefore, a point
of extreme importance to Israel and to the Philistines alike. To
the former it was the connecting link between the tribes north of
Esdraelon and those to the south, while to the latter it meant con-
trol of the important trade-route which drained the rich grain-fields
of the Hauran and passed on to the gardens of Damascus. The
Israelites failed to profit by the advantage they had gained in
possessing themselves, in advance, of the key to the situation.
— 2. And the Philistines pursued Saul and his sons closely] is
paralleled by the action of the King of Syria who commanded his
charioteers at the battle of Ramoth-gilead to attack only the person
of the King of Israel (i K. 22^'). — Jonathan, Abinadab, Malchi-
shiia]. Cf. 833=9''. — 3. The archers hit him]. The Heb. idiom
has it, "the axchtrs found him." — 4. Draw thy sword and thrust
me through]. Cf. Ju. 9=^ — But his armorbearer woidd not] either
because of his reverence for his lord (Sm.), or, more likely, from
fear of blood-revenge {cf. 2 S. 2"), which would be all the more
certain to overtake one who slew the Lord's anointed {cf. i S. 26').
— Then Saul took his own sword and fell upon it]. One of the
rare cases of suicide in the OT., cf. v. ' 2 S. 17" i K. 16' ^ -j-, also
2 Mac. io'3 i4<i-«. — 6. The abridgment, all his house, for "his
armorbearer and all his men" of i S., can scarcely be a reference
to Saul's servants (Ba.), yet it is certain that Saul's house did not
perish at that time {cf 2 S. 2' '•). This is probably nothing more
than a careless statement by the Chronicler. Still, Bn. prefers
the text of Chronicles. — 7. The valley from which the men of Israel
saw the defeat was that of Jezreel {cf. Ho. i^. — They forsook
their cities] one of which was doubtless Beth-shan, where the bodies
of Saul and his sons were exposed (i S. 3i"'- ''). The tenure of
the Philistines was of short duration, for in 2 S. 2 » we find Abner
making Ish-bosheth king over Jezreel. Yet this kingship may
have been one of vassalage to the Philistines. — 9. And took his
head] implying that he had been beheaded, a fact directly stated in
the parallel. — 10. And they put his weapons in the house of their
gods] just as the sword of Goliath had been deposited at the
sanctuary at Nob (i S. 21'). — The variation of the text of v. •<"• and
I S. 31'°'' suggests that in the original both readings were found:
l82 I CHRONICLES
i.e., the passage -read, His weapons they placed in the ho7ise of
Astarte, his skull they nailed in the house of Dagon and his body
they exposed on the wall of Beth-shan (Be., Zoe., Oe., Bn.) : other-
wise I S. preserves the original text (We., Dr., Ki., Sm.) and, as
is most hkely, we have here a modification of the Chronicler. — In
the house of Dagon] to whom there were temples at Gaza (Ju.
i6'-' ff ) and at Ashdod (i S. 5 i Mac. iqss-ss ii4)_ Dagon may be
derived from Tl, fish, hence has been described by David Kimhi
as having the head and arms of a man and the body and tail of a
fish, or from ]51, corn, whence Philo Byblius makes him a god
of husbandry. The latter seems more appropriate for the in-
habitants of the Philistine plain, but the uncertain origin of these
people leaves the question open (cf. Del. Par. p. 139; Sayce, Rel.
Bab. pp. 188/.; Scholz, Gotzendienst, pp. 2^,8 ff.; Baud, in PRE.*
III. pp. 460^.; Jen. Kosmol. pp. 449 _^.). — 11. 12. All the in-
habitants^ of Jabesh-gilead]. These paid a debt of gratitude to
Saul (cf. I S. II'-") by recovering his body and those of his sons —
according to i S. in a raid by night — and giving them honourable
burial in a sacred place, und^r the oak in Jabesh. Burying the
dead was considered an act of piety {cf. Tob. i'^ 2^). — The doubtful
phrase "and burnt them there" of i S., considered original by
Sm., was omitted by the Chronicler, since burning was looked upon
as something abominable (Am. 2'). — The exact site of Jabesh-
gilead is uncertain. The name is still preserved in Wady Yabis.
Eusebius places it six Roman miles from Pella. Oliphant sought
it in the ruins Meriamin, and so more recently Merrill (but see
Buhl, GAP. p. 259). Robinson conjectured the ruins ed Deir
on the south side of the wady but somewhat off the road from
Beisan to J crash (so GAS.). — 13. 14. This reflection upon the
death of Saul with the observation that Yahweh turned the king-
dom unto David is direct from the Chronicler, and after his
manner cf. 2 Ch. 12^ 1318 21"' 24" 252° 27^ 28". The cause of
Saul's death is found in his trespass of not keeping the word of
Yahweh, probably with reference to the disobedience recorded in
I S. 13'^ ' 15'-", and Saul's consultation with the witch of Endor
I S. 28' ff-. In V."" Saul is apparently misrepresented, since ac-
cording to I S. 28^ Saul did ask of Yahweh but the Lord did not
X. 1-14.] DEATH OF SAUL 183
answer him. Doubtless the thought of the Chronicler was not
far from that of the mod. commentator who writes, "Saul had
neglected to seek the favour of Jehovah with proper zeal and then
inquire of Him" (Zoe.).
1. icnVj] preferred as the original form by Bu., Sm. i S. 31'
D^cnSj. — s'^M on] I S. TJN iDn. On vtt in distributive sense cf. Gn.
95 iqs 40^- 5 Ex. 123 and often. — ioSj] i S. vaSjn also v. ». — 2. . . . nnx
nnvN] I S. 312 nxi . . . pn. On the Chronicler's usage with nnx
cf. Ju. 20" I S. 14=2. — fnjv] I S. jnjin\ The spelling injv is found
elsewhere, in i S. 132- 3 and some 27 other times. — 3. Sisjy *?>•] 1 S.
313 'b> Sx. The substitution of Sy for Sn may be due to the influence
of Aramaic, which does not use ha. Bn. regards Sj? as the original. —
nts'pa Dmsn] i S. 'pa dii^jn omen. The Chronicler has preserved the
better order and according to Bu. the better text. If qii^'JN belonged
to the original text it should precede amen (Dr.). — onrn JD Shm] i S.
onicnD nND Vn-'i. Probably the Chronicler's text is an abridgment.
- The verb SnM presents a difficulty. Dr. takes it from S^n "trembled."
Sm. thinks that 05 takes the word from S'^n, we think more likely from
nSn, an apocopated Hoph. or for n';;n;i (Klo.), cf. i K. 2234 = 2 Ch. 18"
and 2 Ch. 35^3. 05 renders here and 2 Ch. iS^s 3523 by the same word
iirbvecav, iwdveaa. Bu. gives the clause up as hopelessly corrupt. —
4. n-j'j-Sn] I S. 3i< Nii'jS. — Before iSSynni i S. has ^l-\p-\\ The Chron-
icler's text is better (Bu., Sm.). — 5. annn] i S. 31^ mn, which after
05 is to be preferred (Bn.). — i?:y is omitted after nci. Bn. regards
both as additions to the original text, pdm is wanting in 05^ by haplog-
raphy. — -6. inn nn'' mo Ssi] an abridgment of i S. 316 ^0 dj pSd nz•:^
nni f<inn dv3 vv:i<. — 7. C'N Sj] i S. 31' ^^m. — pcya -wa] preserving
more nearly the original text and an abridgment of i S. of which the
present text is pi^n la^a -\Z'H} pDjrn laya -ii*'n, and in which i3>?a each
time is probably a corruption of nya in the cities of (Klo., Bu., Sm.).
Dr. retains the present text of i S. — hn-\'if> ^B'js, are the subject of iDj
in I S. 05 has here I(rparj\, from which Kau. supplies Sxii'^ ^U'js,
so also Ki. Some subject seems necessary. (B^ with Tras before
Iffpa-qX = '■> '?o may retain the original reading of Ch. Then the
verb must be put in the sg. with C|. — onny] i S. onyn nx. — ona] i S.
pa. — 8. I S. 3i8hasnB'Sa> ns before vja. — 9. nn^ mn-\ nx iKtrn mo'B'D^i
vSa] I S. 31' vSa nx itati'DM ib'n-i nn 101311. — ^inWM] Pi. requires as its
object the head and weapons of Saul (so Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Sm.).
Since, however, the inf. la'aS implies a personal subject it may be
well to understand messengers as the object of inStt>ii and point as
a Qal (Kau., Ki., Bu.). — anoxj; nx] i S. ']i no, the former is to be
preferred (Bu., Sm.). — 10. oninSx n>a] probably a direct departure
184 I CHRONICLES
from I S. 31"' nnntt'y n-3. mncp sg. (Dr., Bu., Sm.). — ipSjSj nio
pjTrT'j y;pr^] i S. ja* no nama lypn in'u pni. Instead of vpn, they
drove in as a tent pin, we probably should read lypn in i S. they
exposed after Lagarde (Dr., Bu., Sm., Ki., Bn.). — 11. B'2> S^ u'-C'i
■ipSj] I S. 31" nv'^J !r''3' ■'3-i" v'?N 1J?ct^•■'1. Ki. restores the latter in his
text of Ch. (SBOT., Kom.). (& read ijjSj uir'' Sj, which suggests
'j CJ' ''3B'' S3 as original here, so Kau., Bn. — "wh Sa hn] i S. icn nw.
— 12. After Sin i S. 3112 has nSi'^n Ss 13S11. — naij . . . nou nx initm]
I S. HMj . . . n^u PN inpM. The Chronicler has substituted the
Aram, and late Heb. word hdu, found in the OT. only here, for
DMj. — After VJ3 the Chronicler has also omitted ]Z' n'3 pcins. — ciN^'an
ns'Oi] I S. ntt'a> itOM. The Chronicler perhaps has only added the
sf. because the vocalisation originally may have been the same {(&,
#). — Ch. omits 08' DON idib"!. — too h'^nh rnn oninicsj? nt< napM] i S.
3i'3nr30 h-z."A7\ nnn napM aninicsy ns inp^. — 13. The verse presents
the heavy peculiar style of the Chronicler. — Sixs''?] inf. used mstead
of the finite verb (Ew. § 351 c, Ges. § 114/', Dav. Syn. § 96 R. 4), c/.
6". — ^'■nS] inf. in a supplemental sense equivalent in meaning to gain
instruction.
XI. 1-3. David made king over all Israel. — The Chronicler
omits, as foreign to the purpose of his narrative, David's reception
of the news of Saul's death, his reign over the tribe of Judah, and
his contest with the house of Saul (2 S. 1-4), and proceeds at once
to David's establishment as king over all Israel. The narrative
is a close copy of 2 S. 51-^ — 1. In 2 S. instead of all Israel "all the
tribes of Israel came," who represented the adherents of the house
of Saul in distinction from the tribe of Judah over which David
was reigning. The Chronicler, having in view the main fact rather
than the details of the history which he is passing over in silence,
uses Israel as including Judah with the rest (r/. w. ^ «). — 3.
According to the word of Yahweh by the hand of Satnnel]. These
words are the Chronicler's contribution to the narrative taken
from 2 S. It has been inferred that the Chronicler had among
his sources a "Testament of Samuel" (Bn.), but perhaps it is
sufficient to think of i S. 1$^^ 16' ■ '.
1. hi<-\^-> hs is3|i<i] 2 S. 5' Sn-ic^ ^taatf So in3m. — idnS] 2 S. icnS icnm
where isxm is wanting in H and -idnS in <S. — r\:n] 2 S. ujn. — 2.
The third dj is wanting in 2 S. 5=. — xixinn npN i'^d] 2 S. ir^y i^v
«'«siD nrron nnx. — Nocm] 2 S. ''ncm is probably a scribal error, Ges.
XI. 1-9. j DAVID MADE KING 1 85
§ 74^.— n^n?N ^^^T^^] 2 S. mn^, also (!« in Ch. followed by Ki., SBOT.,
but the Greek tradition seems rather to support 1^, cf. (&^^, B. — The
second loy is wanting in <& and 2 S., hence is omitted by Ki., SBOT.
—3, onS] 2 S. 5' + I'^cn.
4-9. The capture of Jerusalem. — This is a somewhat free
and modified transcript of 2 S. s"'". The chronological notices of
2 S. 5^ ' are omitted here to be inserted in a more appropriate
place (29"). — 4. Chronicles has all Israel engaged with David
in the assault upon Jerusalem, while 2 S. speaks of "the king and
his men," i.e., his body-guard or warriors. The Chronicler has
added the archaeological note explaining Jerusalem as though
anciently called Jehus. This is after the usage of P, cf. Jos. 15^
jgie. 28 ju. igio- 1'. Jebus as the ancient name of the city is proba-
bly a mere fancy derived from the fact that the Jebusites dwelt
there at the time of David. In the Amarna tablets the name
Urusalim repeatedly occurs, while there is no trace of a name cor-
responding to Jebus. Jerusalim is also given as the name in
Ju. i^- " Jos. 15*3 2 S. 5^ {cf. Moore on Ju. 19'°). — And there
were the Jebusites the inhabitants of the land]. In 2 S. we have
"against the Jebusites the inhabitants of the land," which phrase
sets forth directly the thought of an attack upon non-Israelites
as the purpose of David, while Chronicles has turned the words
into a description of the conditions of the time of David. — 5.
Chronicles gives but the first part of the defiant speech of the Jebu-
sites to David, omitting the scornful boast of the impregnability of
Jerusalem, that the blind or the lame could defend it (2 S. 5^).
Probably the reference to them was no longer understood. — 6.
This verse is far smoother and quite different from the obscure
parallel in 2 S. Although this prowess of Joab with its reward is
nowhere else mentioned, it probably was not an invention of the
Chronicler, and his later position as commander-in-chief may have
had some connection with the capture of Jerusalem in spite of the
fact that he led the men of David earlier (2 S. 2"). — 8. Millo]
part of the fortifications of Jerusalem; location and meaning are
obscure (cf. 2 S. 5^ i K. 9'^ ^* 11"). The Chronicler placed it in
the city of David 2 Ch. 32^ (for discussion GAS. /. II. pp. Aoff.). —
And Joab restored the rest of the city]. This statement has no
1 86 I CHRONICLES
parallel in 2 S. The rest of the city means the city apart from the
citadel; David thus rebuilt the fortress and Joab the rest of the
city. This legend concerning Joab may have arisen from the
prominence of the family of Joab in post-exilic Israel, 4'< Ezr. 2*
8» (We. TS.).
4. Ss-ia^ Sdi im-i] 2 S. 5« vrjNi iScn. (gB adopted by Ki., SBOT.,
favoured by Bn., follows 2 S. (&^ and ^ agree with l|. — O'.:" ''Di3\t dci]
2 S. 3Ci> ^DUTi Sn. — 5. Di3> >a;'> icnm] 2 S. ncN''i. — 8. 30D3 -\";n pii
3'30n lyi Ni'^an jc] 2 S. 5' n,-i''3i Ni'^i^n p a^3D T'n pM. (gB omits
3^30,1 -ij?i NiScn p. (|i- follows i|. 3<3Dn is suspicious, especially
with the art., so perhaps the original was non n]?i and to the palace
(Bn., Ki.). — nj3 (nja^i) is here used with the meaning to rebuild with
the added notion of enlarging, cf. 2 Ch. 8^ ii^ 26^, merely rebuild-
ing, 2 Ch. 32^ 333. le (BDB.). — -i-yn -\n'^ rs n^m aNVi] wanting in
2 S. C&B lias »cai iTToX^fitja-ev Kal eXa/Sej* ttJj' ir6Xtj' with David as the
subject. (^L follows l|. & translates: "Joab gave his right hand to
the rest of the men who were in the city." This paraphrase is
based upon the rendering of n<n> to keep alive (so Ba.). But the
meaning to restore is supported by (^^ Trfpteiroi-^aaro, and the use of
rT>n in Ne. 32^. — 9. nini] 2 S. 5'° +''n'^N.
10-47. David's mighty men. — This section is taken from
2 S. 238-39 with the exception of the introductory v. '°, and w.
4ib-47 which give the names of sixteen additional mighty men not
recorded elsewhere. These additional names and the superscrip-
tion, V. =«■», have suggested that the entire list, xx. "■<', came from
a source independent of 2 S. (Bn.) and perhaps the source of 2 S.
(Graf). Another explanation is that \^'. ■"'=-" are out of place,
belonging in c. 12 between v. " and v. » (Bu. in Com.). The names
in VA^<"'■" are in many instances if not all of persons from east of
the Jordan. The first twelve of these heroes given in w. '» ^ are
mentioned again as monthly commanders of the army of David
(272-15^
10. And these were the chief of the mighty men who belonged
to David who held strongly with him in respect to the ki?igdom,
together with all Israel to make him king]. These words explain
the Chronicler's introduction of the list of the mighty men at this
point in his narrative. He regarded them as participants in the
coronation of David. In fact, many of these mighty men probably
XI. 10-47.] DAVID'S MIGHTY MEN 187
won their places in subsequent campaigns of David and were
unknown at tliis time (We. Prol. p. ij 7,). —According to the word
of Yahweh unto Israel] is a good example of the Chronicler's re-
ligious comment and view-point of David's reign.
11-14. The three mightiest. — This section is incomplete.
Vv. =''-'"' of 2 S. 23 have been omitted by a copyist {v. i.), so that
the name of the third hero Shammah is lacking and his exploit is
assigned to Eleazar the second hero, whose own exploit has been
omitted. — 11. Instead of Jashobeam we should read Ishbaal, and
instead of thirty, three, of whom Ishbaal was the foremost, coming
before Eleazar and Shammah. After 2 S. also eight hundred
should be read instead of three hundred. — 12. Dodai *]. v. i. —
Ahohite]. Cf. v. ^9. — 13. Pas-dammim] wanting in 2 S. 29',
Ephes-dammim (i S. 17') {v. i.).— 14. They stood, etc.]. Read
after 2 S. 29", he stood, etc.
10. a^'prnncn] cf. 2 S. 3« Dn. lo^i and for references 2 Ch. i'. — 11.
■1CD3] 2 S. 238 nistt', which Ki. prefers here. But the probability is
that Ch., the harder reading, has preserved the original, since the
sum is given in 2 S. 2339 {cf. Bn.). — oy^tt'^] <&^ leffe^ada, l lecTffe^aaX,
which are certainly not corruptions of ^ I<r/3aa//, = M. 2 S. z^"*
na-'j, CgB lea^bade L lecr/SaaX. The Lucian text reveals the true
reading '?;3-.y or Sy^'^'x (Dr., Ki., et al.). The reading of 2 S. is a
corruption of Ptt'J-ii^N, cf. S^'. — •'jiDDn-p] 2 S. ■'JCDnn = ■'jCDnn (We.
TS., Dr., Bu.). In 272 we have Sni^t p, which Bu. adds to the
text of 2 S. The reference in Hachmonite is unknown. A cor-
ruption of DiD-n^a has been seen in it (£Bi.).— D^ci^'cn cni] Qr. 'n
Dv^i'?^n, 2 S. ^wh^n vn'\. Thus the Heb. texts provide three render-
ings, chief of the thirty (l®" in Ch. preferred by Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.),
chief of the captains, chief of the third part (of the army), so (S" in
2 S. preferred by Ba. <&^ in both 2 S. and Ch. represents ti'NT
nirSrn, chief of the three. This (preferred by We. TS., Dr., Bu.,
Kau., Now., Ki., Mar., Bn.) is probably original. The three were
Ishbaal, Eleazar v. ", and Shammah son of Agee 2 S. 23". — ■\^^^U
in-'jn dk] 2 S. 238 usyn ijny. The latter text is meaningless and the
former is generally accepted as the true reading in 2 S. {cf Dr.,
Bu.), although unsupported by (S {cf We. TS.). Mar. reads in 2
S. nxyn his axe, instead of in-'jn his spear. — t:''^!f] 2 S. njcii', which is
to be preferred, since Ishbaal had the first place and three hundred
are mentioned slain by Abishai, v. ^o (Ki., Bn.).— 12. p itjjVn] is
wanting in 2-j*, probably through copyist's error (Dr., Ki.). Mar.
regards this omission as the better reading for 2 S. 23'. — \-\i-^] 2 S.
188 I CHRONICLES
nn, which is the true reading. Otherwise the text of 2 S. for this
verse is inferior to Ch. and is to be restored accordingly (Dr.,
Bu.). — 13. D^ai dd] usually taken as equivalent to a^'m dsn (i S.
17'), is a misreading of Donnj 2 S. 23'. Mar. with probability
sees in both 2 S. and Ch. a corruption of a''NDi pnpa (r/. v. '*
14' 2 S. 5"- 22 2313). — After ncnSD'? a copyist has omitted that
portion of the text found in 2 S. 23 between Oif iddnj D'ni:''^D2
ncn'^cS V. ', and ninS a^ncSfl iflD.XM v. ", through the eye wandering.
— For aniys', barley, 2 S. 23" has Qityv, lentils. It is impossible to
determine which is correct. — 14. The verbs i3X>n>i> niSix>i, and ^y\
are to be read in the sg. after 2 S. 23'^ and (& (Ki., Bn.). A copy-
ist was either misled by the pi. in IDJ v. " (also sg. in 2 S.) or in-
troduced these plurals by design to associate David with Eleazar
(Ke., Ba.). — ysyvi] 2 S., 05 »'P''1.
15-19. The exploit of three mighty men at Bethlehem (=
2 S. 23"-"). — The compiler of 2 S. probably thought that the
actors of this story were the three mighty men just mentioned, but
since they are three of the thirty chief and the thirty have not yet
been mentioned, they are probably entirely different and the story
is out of its original connection (We. TS., Dr., Bu., Bn.). V. '«'■
appears to have been the true conclusion of w. "-■^, and vv. ■=-'«»
probably came after the list of the thirty (in 2 S. w. "''" after
v. ") (so Bu., SBOT.). The variations betv^^een Ch. and 2 S. are
few and unimportant. — 15. Unto the stronghold^ of 'Adullam]
see below. — The Philistines were in the Valley of Rephaim, a
plain south of Jerusalem. According to Josephus {Ant. vii. 12. 4)
it was twenty stadia south of Jerusalem and reached to Bethlehem.
Cf. 14' Jos. 158 18'^ 2 S. 5'8- S2 23'3 Is. 175, Buhl, GAP. p. 91.—
18. And the three brake through the host] an exploit probably made
by night and possible through the loose discipline of the time,
cf. I S. 26^-1=. — The water was too precious to drink, hence David
poured it out, as a libation offering, unto Yahweh. — 19. Shall I
drink the blood of these men] for the risk at which the water was.
brought made it equivalent to their blood, cf. the command not to
eat the blood of animals but "to pour it out on the groimd like
water," Dt. i2'6- 23-25 1^2
■23
15. (S of 2 S. 23" omits C'x-i and is followed by Bu., SBOT.,
who thinks the word has come from 2 S. 23'*. — ix"i] the true read-
XI. 10-47.] DAVID'S MIGHTY MEN 189
ing. 2 S. i^xp. — mjJD] 2 S. the same. Read mxD after v. '« (We.
TS., Dr., Bu., Kau., Ki., Bn.). Adullam was a hill fortress, not a
cave, cf. Baed.<, p. 1.24. Buhl, GAP. p. 97.— njn^] an equivalent
suggested by the following D''jn for the more unusual n-'n of 2 S.,
if the latter is the true reading.— 16. i^sji] 2 S. 23" asai.— 17. \HT^'\\
2 S. 23's niNnM. On the apocopated form of Ch. see Ges. § 756&.
— 1133] 2 S. 1S3D. -isa a ivcll of living water, but 113 properly a
cistern. The change may have been intentional. To-day no well is
found at the gate of Bethlehem, Rob. BR."^ I. pp. 470. 473'. SWP.
iii. p. 28; so also v. '«. — 18. na-Sii-n] 2 S. 23I8 onjjn n»''?tt'.— ion]
Pi. t, 2 S. ID^ Hiph. — 19. •'n'^Nc] 2 S. 23'^ nin\ p in such an
expression is the better usage. — nricx] necessary to complete the
sentence is lacking in 2 S. The original of 2 S., however, may
have been different (see Bu., Sm.). — .-ir.i'Dja] in 2 S. preceded by
didShh which is restored here by Oe., Kau., who went at the risk of
their lives. The prep, in that case is 3 pretii as here in D.-'irDJ32
in the following clause. Without this restoration the 3 is that of
accompaniment, Ges. § 119", cf. On. 9^ Lv. 17", the blood of these
men shall I drink with {i.e., and therewith) their lives (Ke., Ki.). —
niNon Dnv>:'Dj3 13] an explanation of the previous Dma'SJ3 from the
Chronicler.
20-25. Exploits of Abishai and Benaiah ( - 2 S. 2^,'^-^^).—
The immediate connection of these verses with the preceding and
the reference in the present Hebrew text to the three suggest that the
two heroes Abishai and Benaiah were members of the triad who
broke through unto the well at Bethlehem and constituted a second
triad of heroes distinct from the first three and also distinct from
the thirty. This view apparently appears in B and AV. and RV.,
and was generally that of ancient interpreters. The prevailing
modem view, however, is that those who drew the water at Bethle-
hem are entirely unknown and that, further than in their exploit,
they do not constitute a triad of heroes distinct from the thirty,
and in short only one such triad is mentioned, viz. Ishbaal, Eleazar,
and Shammah. The text presents a certain amoiint of confusion
and uncertainty. Abishai and Benaiah, while not equal to the
three (vv. '^ ■ ^s) , yet clearly form a class by themselves, but whether
distinct from the thirty (according to Dr., Mar.) or enrolled among
the thirty (according to Kau., Bu., Ki.) is not clear. — 20. 21. And
Abishai,"^ the brother of Jo\jb, was the thirty^ s"^ chief, and he
swung his spear over three hundred slain and he had renown like
190 I CHRONICLES
the three. A tnong the thirty'^- behold Jie* was in honor and he became
their captain, yet he did not attain unto the three]. For further
events in the life of Abishai cf. iS'^ i S. 26^ "■ 2 S. 16" 18^ 21"' ' . —
22. Benaiah the son of Jehoiada from Kabze'el was a man of
valor*, mighty in deeds. He slew two young lions having gone
to their lair;* and he went down and slew a lion in a pit on a
snowy day\ The prowess of Benaiah in conflict with wild beasts
is here vividly set forth; in the following verse his prowess as a
warrior. — Kabze^el] was a town in south Judah, unidentified, cf.
Jos. 15=' Ne. 11=5. — 23. Five cubits high] a touch of description
wanting in 2 S., as also like a weaver's beam, derived probably
from the story of Goliath, i S. 17' 2 S. 2i'9. Another resemblance
to the Goliath story is the fact that the Egyptian v/as slain with
his own weapon, i S. 17". — 24. And he had renown like* the three
mighty men]. Cf. •'^ ^'>.
20. iti'DN] 2 S. 2318 correctly tiy^^N, so also (B, cf. 2^^. — ntriS::'.-!]
2 S. Kt. the same; Qr. ^z>'iz'7[ -. but some mss. (see Gins.) and 2 S.
have u>Z'hz'n, the true reading, adopted by Be., We. TS., and schol-
ars generally (not by Ke., Oe.). — xSi] Qr. and 2 S. ^\h^, so also (&,
U, &. The >fS is preferred by Mar., who reads '2 Dp n*?, Jie was
not reckoned among the three. Others generally read 'h. — Instead of
nB''?2'3 we read with Bu. and Sm. nz'hz'::. Dr. retains iH in 2 S.
with a similar meaning. "Abishai and Benaiah had a name beside
'the Three' though not fully equal to theirs." Kau., Ki., and Bn.
read D'-S'Ssyj. — 21. niri'^;:'.! p] 2 S. 231^ the same; a comparison with
v."" shows that we should read a^tr'i'^tr'n ]d (We. TS., and scholars
generally). Dr., Mar., Sm., translate "more than the thirty, etc.,"
which puts Abishai and also Benaiah (see v. ^) in a distinct class
by themselves apart from the thirty. In favour of this is the fact
that the number thirty is complete without them {cf. 2 S. 23").
Others translate "from among the thirty," thus enrolling the two with
them (Kau., Ki.). — a^juo] retained by Ki. with the rendering "stand er
zweifach in Ehren"; rejected by Kau., Bn., who (as above) substitute
ijn from v. =5, which is the reading of We., Dr., and Bu. in 2 S.,
where we have ''jn, a certain corruption. Sm. prefers to read Nin.
^22. p] before S^n c-iN should be omitted as (5 in 2 S. 232", since
Benaiah and not his grandfather is clearly described (We. TS.,
Dr., Kau., Ki., et at.). — diSjjo 3n] usually rendered mighty in deeds
but by Bu., since his origin is here described, mighty in possessions,
the striking thing being that a man of wealth should be a hero. —
XI. 10-47.] DAVID'S MIGHTY MEN 19I
3sn Ss'is ':•.;• pn] (6 in 2 S. and (S'- here have SxnN <j3 ■'yy nx,
adopted by We. TS., Kau., Dr., Ki., Bn., and the last four also
read 3N1CD. Retaining the text the rendering has been given, He
smote the two altar pillars of Aloah (Ba., WRS., Religion 0/ Semites,
note L). The use of hdh is against this. We prefer with Bu. after
Klo. (owing to similarity of '?wsnx with ns in the next sentence)
DNiina-rvS nsn >J3 •■jp*. This places in a natural order the exploits of
Benaiah. Otherwise two of warfare are separated by one of hunting.
The prep, ^.s is used in a pregnant sense. — 23. ma i:'\s] 2 S. 23-'
nx-io ti'^N preferred by Ba., while the reading of Ch. is preferred by
We. TS., Dr., Bu., Mar.— 24^. See v. 2°.— 25. See v. 21.
26-47. The mighty men of valor. Vv. =6 ^la = 2 S. 232^ 39a.
— The title given in v. ^sa (wanting in 2 S.) to this section shovi^s
that the Clironicler regarded this list as independent of those men-
tioned above. The addition of the sixteen names in w. ^^^-"^
carrying the number far beyond thirty, has probably led to the
removal of any relation to the thirty by the omission of that refer-
ence in v.* and of the summary in v. •". Compared with 2 S. the
list is better preserved in Chronicles. The great majority of these
men, apart from this list and the one in 2 S., are otherwise unknown
and hence require no comment. Nine of them, with Jashobeam,
Eleazar, and Benaiah (y. s.), however, appear in the Chronicler's
list of the captains of David's ho.st (27^-15).
26-41. — 26. 'Asah'el] {cf. 2'« 27') slain in the war with Ish-
bosheth. — Elhanan] the name also of the slayer of GoHath (2 S.
21" cf. 20^) ;• the two have been regarded as identical. — 27. Sham-
moth the Harorite] perhaps identical with Shamhuth mentioned
in 278;- V. also i. — Helez]. Cf. 271". — Pelonite] v. i. — 28. 'ira].
Cf. 273. — Teko'ite] from Teko'a, cf. 2'-K — Abi'ezer]. Cf. 27 '2. —
' Anathothite] from 'Anathoth, cf. 6'^ <««>. — 29. Sibbecai] 2 S. 23"
Mebunai {v. i.). Cf. 271'. — Hushathite] from Hushah, cf. 4^. —
Ilai] an uncertain name (v. i.). — Ahohite] reference unknown. —
30. Maharai]. Cf. 27 >3. — Netophathite] from Netophah, cf. 2".
—Heled] 2 S. 23" Heleb {v. i.). — 31. Benaiah]. Cf. 27 '^ —
Pir athonite] of Pir'athon, a town in Ephraim (cf. Ju. 12"). — 32.
Hurai] 2 S. 23'" Hiddai (v. i.). — Brooks of Ga'ash]. Particular
wadys frequently designate localities; Ga'ash in the hill country of
Ephraim. — Abi'el] 2 S. 23" Abi-'albon, probably Abi-ba'al (v. i.).
192 I CHRONICLES
— 'ArbathUe] from Beth-'arabah, a town of Judah or Benjamin
{cf. Jos. i5»- «')•— 33. 'Azmaveth]. Cf. i2\—Baharuniite] (im-
proper spelling V. i.) from Bahurim, a town of Benjamin {v. i.). —
Sha albonite] from Sha'albim, a town of Dan {cf. Jos. 19"), near
Aijalon.— 34. Hashem] 2 S. 23^2 Jashen {v. i.).—Gizonile] un-
certain (v. i.). — Hararite] uncertain. — 35. Sacar] 2 S. 23"
Sharar (v. i.).—Eliphal] 2 S. 233* Eliphelet {v. i.).— 36. This verse
is entirely uncertain, probably corrupt {v. -/.).— 37. Carmelite]
from Carmel, a town near Hebron. — Na'arai] 2 S. 23=^ Pa'arai
(v. i.). — 38. V. i. — 39. Bcrothite] from Beeroth, a town of Benja-
min.—40. 'lihrile]. Cf. 2".— 41. Uriah the Hittite] the officer
whose wife David iodk.—Zabad] wanting in 2 S. This completes
the list given in 2 S., where is added "thirty and seven in ail"
(2 S. 23"). Zabad may have belonged with the list in 2 S. and for
some reason have fallen from the text, thus making a complete num-
ber of thirty-seven {cf. 2 S. 23"). Chronicles, lacking Elika (see
v. «'), furnishes 3 +2+ 30 =35 names. Usually, however,
Zabad is grouped with the fifteen new names in vv. "-47.
— 26. Di?>nn maj] tlie men of valor, wanting in 2 S. 232«. On
the pi. see Ges. § 124(7.— After ^><i' 2 S. has D^->:'"'^'2.— Instead of
nn read ^tn {cf. v. '=).— anS n^2r] 2 S. '^ n>2.— 27. nici;'] 2 S. 23^
nc^. (gB here and 27* ninctt', preferred by Ki. {SBOT., but not
Kom.) and Bn.— nnnn] 2 S. mnn, usually followed (Be., Ki.), since
a locality Tin ]'•; is mentioned in Ju. 71, near Mt. Gilboa. Bn.
regards this as entirely indecisive. Mar. and EBi. (art. Harodite)
emend to m;'n, connecting it with 'Arad, a town in the Negeb. In
278 this warrior is called an Izrahile ('m?i), but the true reading is
probably •'mr, Zerahite. This favours a Judean origin and so far
the emendation of Mar. and EBi. — After nci:' 2 S. has another
hero mm Np^Ss, Elika the Harodite, but since he is wanting in (&^\
Mar. rejects him. However, this omission is probably due to homce-
oteleuton. — ■'ji'^an] 2 S. 2326 ^aSan. This latter is perhaps to be pre-
ferred, since we know of a corresponding place ta'^D rria, a town of
Judah, Jos. 152' Ne. ii-^ (Be., Ki.). Yet in 271° we have 'ji^sn
and Helez belongs to Ephraim. Bn. well says we know too little of
towns to determine the true reading. Mar. after (&^ KeXw^eJ in 2 S.
reads ^nSrpn, the Keilathite. — 29. oaD] 2 S. 23" ■'jac. Ch., it is
generally acknowledged, has the true reading, since Sibbecai the
Hushathite is mentioned in 2 S. 21^^. — ^^>-;] 2 S. 2328 jid'^x, but d**
EXXwv •- AXXaj*, hence the name may have begun with y, but the
XI. 10-47.] DAVID'S MIGHTY MEN 193
second half is uncertain. We. TS. has Ji'-J.'.— 30. I'^n] 2 S. 23=9 jSn.
The former attested by 27'^ ■'"I'^n, and as proper name by Zc. 6'°, is
read (>-i'?n) by Bu. {SBOT.) and Mar. in 2 S.— 31, >jn>nDn] 2 S.
2330 >}r^-;-\2. The former with the art. is correct. — 32 . mn] 2 S. nn.
It is uncertain which is correct, but the former is preferred by We.
TS., Bu., yet the latter by Ki. — ':'NnN] 2 S. 23« jn'^y '3n. Ch. is
supported by (6" of 2 S. We. TS., Bu., read Sj,'2->.nN.— 33. >cnnan]
read Tiin^n. The reference is to Bahurim, cf. 2 S. 3'* 16* 17'^ 19"
1 K. 28. 2 S. has ''cn-\3n. — 34. •'ja] after 05'- in 2 S. 23^2 to be struck
out, a repetition of the last three letters of the preceding word (Dr.,
Ki., Bu., Mar., Bn.). — Drn] 2 S. l-'\ The former is preferred in 2
S. by Mar. — •'Jiun] wanting in 1^ of 2 S., but (&^ has 6 Vovvl, which
gives the true reading ^jun, the Gunite, of a family of Naphtali, Nu.
26^8 (Dr., Bu., Ki., Mar.). — NJ-.r p irjn''] 2 S. nc:;' jnjin\ (gi- in 2
S. has p and is followed by scholars generally. Whether we should
read H-ri' or net:' is uncertain. The latter is preferred by Ki. after
(&^. We TS. prefers the former (or njn) and thinks that Jonathan
was a brother of Shammah, 2 S. 23", since both were Hararites. —
35. -ID-'] 2 S. 23" -\-\-y. Ki. prefers the former. Bn. the latter, since
supported by (g^ in 2 S. — 'jSan vnN ^m3::n lan (36) : nix p '^sj^Sn]
2 S. 2334 "ijSjd SD-i''nN p aySx •'nincn p i2Dnx p d'^s-'Sn. Kau. re-
tains the text of Ch. Bn. reads ^ho-hn and ■':^jn after 2 S., but re-
gards the text of 2 S. as a whole as entirely corrupt. Ki. prefers the
text of 2 S., inserting from Ch. only lan lis in the place of lODnx
]3. Bu., SBOT., follows 2 S., except that he reads ni3 instead of 12
before "TiDpcn. We prefer: Eliphelet the son of . . . the Ma'acathite,
Eli' am the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite. — 37. ■'3:n p ii>'j] 2 S. 23='
^3isn n;'D. Of these two readings between which Dr., Ki., and Bn.
are undecided, that of Ch. is probably the later, p having been in-
serted before the place adjective (Bu.). — 38. jnj'ns Sxr] 2 S. 23^5 S},.j,
]nj 13. 01° in Ch. has p, which is to be read in the place of inx
(Ki., Bn.), but it is impossible to determine which name is correct,
probably ''nj'' because Sxr is too common to have likely suffered cor-
ruption.— in^c] 2 S. n3XC. The reading of 2 S. is of the nameof a place;
if followed (Ki., but all is uncertain, Bn.), then p represents a proper
name, ^J3 Bani 2 S. — 0^1 is hardly correct. Read either njn after
2 S. the Gadile (Ki.) or 'snjn tlie Geraite, i.e., of the Benjaminite clan of
Gera (Mar.).
42-47. The sixteen persons including Zabad (v. *') added by the
Chronicler to the list given in 2 S. are all otherwise unknown and
we have no other source for determining the correctness of the
names given. — 42. ' Adina the son of Shiza the Reuhenite, chief
194 I CHRONICLES
of the Reubenites and with him thirty]. These words would well
fit into a statement of a gathering of Reubenites unto David
similar to that of the Benjaminites, the Gadites, and the Ma-
nassites mentioned in c. 12. Then the names following would
be a fragment of the list of the thirty who were with 'Adina
and the original place of these verses might well be c. 12 be-
tween V. ' and V. « (Bu. v. s.). In favour of this is the fact
that the gentilic adjectives in w. "-" represent places east of the
Jordan. If this view is not taken, then instead of thirty with
him ('tt' V^V)' we should read over thirty {W'^b*^ ^y) (Be., Ki.,
Bn.). According to Ba. thirty with him is a marginal note de-
signed to follow V. ^"'. — 43. The Aliihnite] is entirely obscure. —
44. The 'Ashterathite] i.e., from Ashtaroth, a city of Bashan, Dt.
I* Jos. Q*" et al. — The 'Aro'erite]. The reference probably is to
Aroer in Moab (cf. 5^). Another Aroer was in southern Judah,
I S. 30^^ — 45. The Tizite]. The place referred to is entirely
unknown. — 46. The Mahavite] v. i. — 47. The Mezobaite] v. i.
46. DMnnn] is an impossible form for a singular gentilic name,
Kau. and Ki. give it up as hopelessly corrupt. Be. suggested ^jnon the
Mahanite, i.e., from Mahanaim east of the Jordan. (^"^ has Moweiv
possibly representing 'Jippn the Meonite, i.e., probably one from Beth
Meon, a city of Reuben, Jos. 13" {(&^ Mie£, ^ Maiodi, are corruptions
of ^). — 47. noxnn] is also a corruption. Kau. and Ki. attempt no ren-
dering. Possibly we should read nn^:^ from Zobah {cf. v. 's) (Be., Ba.).
XII. 1-23 (1-22). David's recruits when estranged from
Saul. — In I S. 22" we are told how David became captain of a
band made up of his kinsfolks, fellows in distress, debtors, and
discontented and desperate men generally. That is a narrative
of history, while in this present chapter we have a Jewish Midrash
or interpretation whereby David's recruits become the choicest
and most valiant representatives of the tribes of Israel, and come
to him in such numbers that instead of some four hundred or six
hundred men (i S. 22= 272), he has under him a great host like
the host of God (v." <">). Our chapter then has no real his-
torical worth. The names it contains, however, probably are
not fictitious, but are those of leading men of the tribes some of
whom in actual life may have been associated with David.
Xn. 1-23.] DAVID'S RECRUITS I95
The chapter is assigned by Bn. to the Chronicler's sources; according
to Ki. vv. 1-22 may have been written by the Chronicler, but contain here
and there material of good historical worth; vv. =^-'" he assigns to M.
The heavy style of vv. '• » "*) suggests that they were written by the
Chronicler (r/. 11'° 23=' 27'), and the exaggerated statement of v. 23 (22)
is certainly characteristic of him (c/. especially 22= ^- '■* ^■). In the light
of the loyalty of Benjamin to Saul, even long after his death (2 S. 16^ "■
20), the statement that large numbers of Benjaminites deserted to
David (vv. ' ^- " ^- "^ ^•>) and among them even a Gibeathite, one from
Saul's home town, is historically suspicious. Benjamin formed a part of
the kingdom of Ishbaal (2 S. 2'). Since certainly in post-exilic times
Benjamin held a high position in the Jewish community (Ne. 11' «■), it
was an act of pious imagination to relieve this tribe, and especially those
families which were represented in this late community, from the odium
which would attach to those who followed the house of one whom Yah-
weh slew (10"). Only in a work like the Chronicler's where David is
exalted far above even the builder of the Temple (cf. cc. 22^.) and where
Saul is ignored, except to show his ignominious end, should this vindica-
tion of late Benjaminite families be expected. Hence this treatment of
the Benjaminites points to the authorship of the Chronicler. Some of
the names may be old, for he would probably include the reputed
ancestors of well-known Benjaminite families of his own day. Just how
much of this passage may be from an older source is, therefore, uncertain.
The name Bealiah (ni'?;;^), v. ^ ^^\ is certainly old {v. i.).
1-8 (1-7). The recruits from Benjamin at Ziklag. — 1.
On David's sojourn at Ziklag cf. i S. 27"-". — While he was under
restraint through Saul^ i.e., while because of Saul he was not
free to come and go in Israel. — Helpers in war\ Cf. the use of
the verb ("ITJJ) to helpin vv. '' "s) 22'- (21 <■ ). — 2. Using both the right
hand and the left in {slinging'] stones and in {shootingl arrows with
the howl. The Benjaminites are mentioned elsewhere as left-
handed and expert slingers (Ju. 3'^ 20'^). — Of the kinsfolks of Said
of Benjamin]. This statement is probably wide of the historic
truth, since even on the death of Saul the tribe of Benjamin re-
mained faithful to his house, cf. 2 S. 2>5- ^^, and much less can
we believe that such desertions to David took place during Saul's
lifetime. The prominence of the Benjaminites in post-exilic
Israel may have contributed to the origin of such stories. — 3.
Ahi'ezer] elsewhere the name of the chief of the Danites. Nu.
ji2 225 y66. 71 iQ2b j^ — J oash tlic son^ of Shema'iah * f (or J ehosha-
196 I CHRONICLES
wa *) the Gibe athile]. The local reference is to Gibeah of Benja-
min or of Saul the mod. Tell-el-Fid, two and a half miles north of
Jerusalem. — And Jizi'el f (Jezic'el or Jezo^el, Kt.) and Pelet (2" |)
sons of Azmaveth]. Azmaveth is the name also of one of
David's mighty men (11" (/. S^f^). — Beracah -j- and Jehu the
' Anathothite\ Anathoth was a Benjaminite town, the mod.
'Andta, three miles north-east of Jerusalem (SWP. III. 7). — 4.
Ishma iah | the Gibe onite\ Owing to Saul's treatment of the
Gibeonites, a Gibeonite might well have passed over to David.
Cf. 2 S. 21 '-^ — A mighty man among the thirty and over the thirty].
It is noticeable that the list of mighty men given in ii'^ «• is not
called the thirty in Chronicles. Ishmaiah's name also is not in that
list, hence the conception of the thirty here appears to be different
from that of the author of 2 S. 23. — 5 (4**). llie Gederathiie] i.e.,
from Gedera, a town of S. Judah Jos. 1535, perhaps the ruin
Jedtreh nine miles south of Ludd {SWP. III. 43), or since the
context seems to require a Benjaminite town, perhaps the village
Jedtreh north of Jerusalem {SWP. III. g), or possibly the town
was Gedor Jos. 15^^ south-west of Bethlehem mod. Jcdiir (Bn.).
— 6 (5). El'uzai I and Jerimoth {cf. 7^) and Be'aliah]. This last
name (rT'^y^), Yahweh is Baal, represents an early period when
no objection was taken to the identification of Yahweh with Baal
{cf. for similar names 8' S^' 939 nu 14?). — Shcmarjahu f and
Shephatjahu]. Written in the shorter form ("'•tSSw', nnttt:'),
these names are quite common. — The Hartiphite or Ilariphite].
A Hareph appears among the sons of Caleb (s^'). — Sons of
Jlariph are mentioned among those who returned with Zerubbabel.
— 7 (6). Ishshijahu |] a name not infrequent in shorter form
Ishshiah. Cf. 7' 24" et al. — Joezer f]. — Jashobe'am]. Cf. 11".
• — The names Elkanah and 'Azarel are frequent. — Korahitcs].
We are to think of persons from the town of Judah rather than
members of the Levitical clan, cf. 2". — 8 (7). From Gedor*]
V. s. v. 5 (<>'> cf. 4*. Clearly from v. ' t^t) on we have a list of
Judeans rather than Benjaminites, as though two lists had here
been combined (Be.). Perhaps the introductory words for the
Judeans have fallen from the text (Ba.). (Ke. held that all were
Benjaminites, some residing in Judean cities.)
Xn. 1-23.] DAVID'S RECRUITS 197
1. ^jsr:] because of. DBD. njo 6 a and c. — 2. ne'p "'Cpj]. This
phrase occurs also in 2 Ch. 17'' and Ps. 78^ (where •'cn should be
struck from the text as an explanatory gloss). (& omits itt-pj con-
necting ns'p(3) with m;' v. ', and supplies a verb {a-(f>evSovT}Tai) be-
fore B'J0N2. — 3. nj;c*;'n ija] (so Kau.) read perhaps with (S n^ycs' ]2
(Ki., Ba.), or possibly the original read >cu-n> p (c/. >'crin, 3I8).
Then a dittography of the following n caused the trouble. — Snitii
Qr. '^Nn^i] some MSS. read Vsf and '^nv perhaps a corruption of Sxnn'
"God sees" (EBl) (cf. v. ^). — 6. ^onnn Qr. ^siinn] with the first
form agree T' in •<:2, nnn Ne. y-* lo^". — 8. injn] text of Baer. Tnjn
text of Ginsburg and Ki. BH. Heb. mss. vary, (S —dwp.
9-16 (8-15). The recruits from Gad.— Chronologically (fol-
lowing the Hebrew text) this paragraph precedes vv. '-» (^), since
David dwelt in the fortress (v. ' '") before he went to Ziklag.—
9 (8). Separated themselves] i.e., from the other Gadites who were
on Saul's side (Be., Ke., Zoe.). The verb expresses more than
the simple gding over to David which is the rendering of Kau.
and Ki. — To the stronghold in the wilderness']. When David was
fleeing from Saul he sought refuge in the stronghold of AduUam
(ii>5 '• I S. 22* '■) and in others (i S. 23'^) located in the wilderness
of Judah. It was during this period of his life that these Gadites
are represented as coming to him. The reference is not to any
particular stronghold. — Men of the host for battle]. This expression
indicates that these recruits were trained soldiers {cf. 7"). —
Arranging the spear and the shield] i.e., in order for battle, a
peculiar expression also found in Je. 46^ The more usual one is
given in v.-^ <"'. On their likeness to lions in the fierceness of
their appearance or onset, and to roes for swiftness, cf. 2 S. i" 2>8.
—11 (10). Mashmannah f]-— 14 (13). Machbannai -f].— 15 (14).
Heads of the host] i.e., chief warriors (Ke., Zoe.), better, leaders
or commanders (Be., Kau., Ki., RV.). Ki. after B carries forward
this idea of leadership to the next clause : the least one over a
hundred, the greatest over a thousand. With this rendering one
would expect ^3; instead of b- The true interpretation is that the
smallest, or weakest, could cope with a hundred, and the greatest,
or strongest, with a thousand (Be., Ke., Zoe., Kau., RV.). Cf.
Is. 30" Lv. 268. — 16 (15). In the first month] i.e., the month
ig8 I CHRONICLES
Nisan (April), the period of the barley harvest, when the Jordan is
at its flood {cf. Jos. 3'^). In the summer the Jordan is easily ford-
able, but after the melting of the snows on the mountains in the
spring it is hazardous to cross. — And they put to flight all [the
inhabitants of\ the valleys on the east and on the west\ The
writer evidently has in mind that the adherents of Saul opposed
the passage of these Gadites to join David.
9. On the plural force of >^J^ cf. On. io'« « i2«. Kon. iii. § 256 e.
— nspS]. The pathah under s is due to the close connection with
the following word, ^^l omit the phrase and also have airb Tri%
ipr)iwv, implying that the Gadites came from the wilderness evidently
to Ziklag {cf. V. >)• — nn"<l "^^"l- Instead of ncii the Venetian pointed
text, 1526, curiously had pc, perhaps through the influence of Je.
463 (Be.).— nnn'^] on use of inf. see Ges. § 1140.— 14. la-y >nc?j?] Ges.
§ 1340-
17-19 (16-18). Additional recruits from Benjamin and
Judah.— This paragraph reads like an insertion from another
narrative between the accounts of the recruits from Gad and
Manasseh. The omission of the mention of personal names is
striking, and especially the vivid and dramatic form of the nar-
rative.—17 (16). Benjamin and Judah]. The point of view is
post-exilic, cf. v.'.— Unto the stronghold]. Cf. v. ^ 's'.— 18 (17).
And David answered and said]. The Hebrew idiom employs two
verbs in introducing speakers in a colloquy where in English
usually only one is used.—// in peace you have come unto me to
help me then shall mine heart be at one with you; but if to betray
me to my adversaries, although no wrong is in my hands, may the
God of our fathers see and judge]. On this beautiful commitment
by David of his cause to God, with his assertion of innocence, cf.
J s. 24" -'5. — 19 (18). Then the spirit took possession of 'Amasai]
lit. put him on, as a garment, clothed itself with him. Cf. 2
Ch. 242" Ju. 63' (see Moore in loco).— Chief of the thirty (Kt)].
In 11=0 we have found according to the true reading that Abishai
was chief of the thirty, hence Ki., after the interpretation of Be.
and others, reads here Abishai instead of ' Amasai. Others (Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Ba.) prefer to identify Amasai with Amasa (Stt'Cy),
whom Absalom made his commander-in-chief and later David,
Xn. 1-23.] DAVID'S RECRUITS 199
and whom Joab treacherously slew (2 S. 17'* 19'* <"' 20'°). — A^id
he said]. These words are wanting in ^, but are given in (§. —
Thine [are ■we\ O David,
And with thee O son of Jesse,
Peace, peace to thee.
And peace to thy helpers *
Fot thy God hath helped thee.'\
This response is a beautiful bit of Hebrew poetry. David's whole
career from the point of view of the OT. narrators had been
marked by evidences of divine assistance. — The band]. David's
company of four hundred or six hundred men (i S. 22^ 272). The
word band is usually used of marauders (cf. v. ^^ 2 Ch. 22' i S.
308- '5. 23 I K. ii^'' el al.).
18. iniS 23S] equivalent to ^^N 33S. Only here is nni used as a
substantive. — "'D33 onn ahz] neg. circumstantial clause Ges. § 156c.
Use of i<h -wiih. prep, is chiefly poetic and late, cf. v. 34. — 19 . o^'S'iS^'n]
Qr. a''i:'''Sa'n. The former is generally preferred and is the reading
of (B, ^, H. — ip>:i -\n T]^]. CS read q?:;n in -^S. g> also read lS^ re-
peating it, and has otherwise amplified the verse and also the preced-
ing verse. — The pi. T'ltyV should be read after 05, H.
20-23 (19-22). The recruits from Manasseh.— 20 (19).
And of Manasseh some deserted to David] lit. fell. For the use of
the verb '?S3 with this force cf. 2 Ch. 15' 2 K. 25" Je. 21' 37'* 39'
52". — When he went with the Philistines against Saul]. Cf. i S.
28' '• 29' ^•. The clause is used to describe the very time when
David received his recruits from Manasseh. As soon as he re-
turned to Ziklag they came v. ^i (20) and assisted him in his raid
against the Amalekites v. ^^ "". — And he did not help them*] a
continuation of the previous clause. — Because on advice the
tyrants of the Philistines had him sent away saying: At the price
of our heads he will desert to his master Saul]. The phrase at the
price of our heads is suggested by i S. 29^. The thought is that
David would reconcile himself to Saul through some act of treach-
ery involving the death of the Philistines. — 21 (20). When he
returned (lit. went) to Ziklag there deserted unto him from Manas-
seh 'Adnah f, etc.]. This verse fixes more exactly than v. " <">
the time of the accession of these recruits and defines their person-
200 I CHRONICLES
ality. Except 'Adnah (2 Ch. i7>< f) and Zillethai {cf. S"), their
names are not especially rare. — Chiefs of the thousands of Manas-
sch\ The writer is thinking of the military divisions of the tribe
of Manasseh according to P {cf. Nu. 3114- ^s. 62. 64)._22 (21).
And they\ It is difficult to determine whether the pronoun refers
to the seven Manassites just mentioned (Ke., Zoe.) or all the
recruits ^'^'. '■" '=<" (Be., Oe.). — The hand is the Amalekites who
sacked Ziklag during David's absence {v. s. and i S. 30' " ). —
23 (22). This verse explains the host, the last word of the preced-
ing verse. — Like the host of God] i.e., a very great host. The
epithet, "of God," is used to distinguish a thing that is very great
(Dav. Syn. § 34 R 6). (Cf i S. 14'^ Ps. 36^ 80" Jon. 3'.) On
the wide remove of the writer from historical fact see above.
20. D")?}!]. While David and his men might be taken as the sub-
ject, it is better to read with (6 (?) the verb sing. D^^'V, with David
as the subject (Ki.). — 21. ir:!''^]. The choice of "I'^n here may have
been determined by noSS i S. 29". — 22. The word inj (1. 17 ?) is
used of the Amalekites in i S. 308- 's. 23. — 23. arj Dv n;*-] (1. 48).
This phrase is given elsewhere without ryV. This verse is not un-
likely from the hand of the Chronicler instead of from his source.
24-41 (23-40). The number of the soldiers who made David
king at Hebron. — These verses are another account of the events
already related in 11'-'. Their object is to show the completeness
of the assembly of all Israel to make David king, and especially to
set forth the military pomp of the occasion. — 24 (23). And these
are the numbers of the heads of the armed men of the host]. The
word heads occasions a difficulty. Ordinarily heads (D''uS"l) are
interpreted leaders, commanders, or chiefs : and so here by <|>, H,
Be., Ki. This meaning, however, does not agree with the context,
since the number of the heads in that sense is only given of the
house of Zadok (v. -^ '^s'), of Issachar (v. =3 (32))^ and of Naphtali
(y_:6 (34)) • a^ of the other numbers are of the units of the tribes
Hence it has been thought with probability that the heading
originally belonged to a list which, like vx. " '■-^^ -^ '■-''>, con-
tained the names and numbers of chiefs and warriors (Be.).
Others interpret heads as polls, persons (Ba.), after Ju. 5'° (a usage
not paralleled elsewhere with ti'S"! but requiring r.h^hi, see
Xn. 24-41.] HOSTS ASSEMBLED AT HEBRON 201
Moore in loco), or as bands, divisions, after Ju. 7'«- 2" 9"- "■ ** i S.
II" (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). The host is the army of Israel after the
usage of P. — To turn the kingdom of Satil to him according to the
word of Yahweh]. Cf. io'< 11' '". — 25 (24). Bearing the shield
and spear] the large shield (nri) covering the whole man in
contrast with the small shield (pi3) carried as a protection against
arrows. The spear (nD"l) was a lance for thrusting. — The num-
ber of Judah is noticeably small compared with the numbers from
the northern tribes. Ke. explains that since David had already
reigned seven years at Hebron, Judah and Simeon needed to
send only relatively few men, m.erely to witness the ratification
of his kingship by others. The enigma really remains unsolved.
— 28 (27). And Jehoiada the prince of the house of Aaron] iden-
tified with the father of Benaiah (ii"- ""' 2 S. 8"*) (Raschi,
Kimchi, Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.); a simple uncritical reflection
of, Jehoiada the priest that brought Joash to the throne (2 K.
II, 12) (We. Prol. p. 174). The former view probably was
the design of the writer, since according to i K. 2'^ «-, Benaiah
slew Joab in the Tent of Yahweh, and hence from the point of view
of the Chronicler, having such access to the sanctuary, he naturally
would have been of Levitical descent and his father might well
have been a leader of the Levites — distinct from Abiathar the priest
— at the time of David's coronation. In the following verse
Benaiah's cotemporary Zadok is mentioned as a young man
(lj/i), thus in the proper age relation to Benaiah's father. —
29 (28). And Zadok]. Th.xsZ.diddk, who w'xih. tiventy two captains
of his father's house is represented as associated with Jehoiada, is
probably designed to be the priest who with Abiathar was at the
court of David (2 S. 8") and who later supplanted Abiathar
entirely (i K. 2^'->). The twenty-two captains are a reflection of the
twenty-two priestly classes of the post-exilic period 24'-'^ Ne. i2'-7-
12-21 (We., Bn.), yet the twenty-two classes are doubtful. — 30 (29).
For until now] i.e., up to the time of David's coronation, the event
which the v^rriter is describing. — The great part of them kept
their allegiance to the house of Saul] lit. kept the charge of the
house of Saul, a form of expression used frequently of the care
of the sanctuary (23=2 Nu. i" y-^- '"^ et al.). The writer com-
202 I CHRONICLES
plctcly ignores the fact that according to 2 S. 2'° not only Ben-
jamin but all Israel except Judah adhered to the house of Saul
until the death of Ishbaal— 31 (30). 0/or in their fathers' houses].
This is the usual rendering (cf. 5"). But Be. preferred according
to their fathers' houses, i.e., that was their order (for this use of h
cf BDB. 5 i (a)).— 32 (31). And from the half-tribe of Manasseh]
i.e., from ]\Ianasseh west of the Jordan. The other half, east of
the Jordan, is mentioned in v. " C37)_ — \yjiQ ^.^^.g designated hy
name]. Cf 16" 2 Ch. 28'^ 31'^ Nu. i" Ezr. 8". The writer as-
sumes that a roll of individuals was kept and thus these eighteen
thousand were summoned to come to make David king. — 33 (32).
And from the children of Issachar those having an understanding
of the times knowing what Israel shotdd do]. This applies to the
two hundred heads or leaders. The meaning probably is that they
were skilled in astrological lore and thus knew what Israel should
do (® and some of the Rabbins, Be., Oe., BDB. nj? 2 b cf. Est.
I''), though others have found here only the thought of prudent
men who knew what the times demanded (Ke., Zoe., Ba.). This
characterisation of members of the tribe of Issachar has been
brought into connection with the inquiries made at Abel, a town
of Issachar, according to 2 S. 2o»8 (We. Prol. p. i'j^).—And all
their brethren at their command]. The number of these is strangely
omitted, and perhaps has fallen from the original text. — 38 (37).
One hundred and twenty thousand]. The round number of forty
thousand for each tribe. — These contingents that came to make
David king present a total as follows :
Judah 6,800 Issachar ... ?
Simeon .... 7,100 (200 chiefs "and all
Levi ..... 8,300 their brethren")
(4,600 "from Levi," Zebulun . . . 50,000
3,700 with Jehoiada, Naphtali . . . 37,000
Zadok, and 22 captains) (with 1,000 chiefs)
Benjamin .... 3,000 Dan .... 28,600
Ephraim .... 20,800 Asher .... 40,000
Half Manasseh . , 18,000 Tribes E. Jordan 120,000
339.600
Xn. 24-41.] HOSTS ASSEMBLED AT HEBRON 203
The basis upon which these numbers were reckoned it is im-
possible to determine. The writer's object clearly is to magnify
the part taken by the tribes of the subsequent Northern kingdom
in David's coronation. He has imparted a pleasing colour to his
statistics by the variety of phrases with which he describes the
tribal hosts. — 40. 41 (39, 40). CJ. for descriptions of similar joy
and feasting 292"-" 2 Ch. y^-'" i K. 8"--'^'! 2 Ch. 30" ^ . While
sacrifices are not mentioned here, they would naturally accompany
a coronation festival with its oaths of treaty or allegiance (r/. Gn.
2146. 64) _ — Food of flour] i.e., bread stuffs made of wheat or barley,
usually in the form of thin flat round cakes. — Pressed cakes of
figs]. Cf. I S. 25 '« 30'-. In making these the figs are sometimes
first beaten in a mortar and then pressed into a cake (DB.). —
Bunches of raisins]. Cf. i S. 25'8 30'^ 2 S. 16'. These were
dried grapes, probably also pressed into cakes.
24. (B has TO. 6v6ixaTa (nice instead of nsDc). This probably
was written by a careless transcriber through the notion that the
verse was a subscription of the preceding verses. — On the omission of
-i-'s before in3, see Ges. § i55<i. Bn. after (& inserts ib'n. — n^s*? Tm'^'^'"']
V. " S3X ^siSn, those equipped for the host, i.e., for war, cf. Nu. 31^
32" Jos. 4". This phrase is parallel with N3X insii v. ^\ cf. 5'8. —
34. N3X \s:ir]. See v. -••. — ncnVn i'^d Vja ncn'^n "131;'] setting in order
for war with every kind of weapon of war, cf. v. '. — iiy'^i] Ges.
§ 114/'. 05, 31, and some Heb. MSS. have iijrS preferred by Kau., Bn.,
while the text is adhered to by Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki. Here and in
V. 35 Tiy is apparently used as a synonym of "iiy, which word actually
appears in v. '^ in some MSS. {q. v.). Perles suggests as original in
both passages the word -\-fZ' which in Babylonian as saddru has the
technical meaning " arranging (an army) in battle array." A copyist
then inserted "iij; as a gloss to this foreign word in both places, whence
arose the form -nj; by combination of the two (OLZ. 8, 1905, col.
181). — aSi aS xSa] with one heart, lit. " with not a heart of two kinds,"
cf. Ps. 12', for construction Ges. § 123/. Dav. Syn. § 29 R. 8. On
nS3 cf. V. '8. — 35. n^jni] w. ^- 25 ncm. It is uncertain whether we
should draw a distinction between these (Now. Arch. I. p. 362), al-
though the former has been regarded as the heavier weapon used by
great warriors (2 S. 2-^ 2321) (EBi. art. Spear).— 37. xax insv] cf.v.
!". — 39. my] some MSS. and <6 •'2-^y preferred by Kau., Bn. {id. or
^""'y). (f- V. **.
204 I CHRONICLES
XIII. 1-14. The removal of the ark from Kiriath-jearim.
— This narrative is taken from 2 S. 6'-", but is provided by the
Chronicler with an introduction w. '■" fitting it into his conce})tion
of the organised hosts of Israel and of the activity of the Levites at
that time. In giving the removal of the ark immediately after
David's coronation and capture of Jerusalem (11'-') the Chronicler
has departed from the order of 2 S., where accounts of David's
building himself a house, and of his family and of his victories
over the Philistines (2 S. 5"-"), precede the mention of his removal
of the ark. The Chronicler has clearly placed this last event first
in order to magnify David's concern for the worship of Yahweh.
David's religious acts are the main thing with the Chronicler.
Others are mere episodes in the King's career.
1. For such consultation with all officers of the realm cj. 28'
2 Ch. 1 2. This representation may be due to the Chronicler's
desire to minimise the suggestion of the arbitrary authority of the
King seen in the books of S. and K. (Ba.).— 2. All the assembly of
Israel] i.e., the assembly of officers. — Let its send in every direction
(Oe., Ba.) or let tis send quickly (Be., Ke., Zoe., Ki.)]. The former
rendering (RV.) is the better according to the meaning of the verb
(pS), cf. On. 28^* Is. 543 Jb. ii» (but v. i.).—Wlio are left in all
districts of Israel] i.e., those who did not come to make David king
in Hebron. The writer closely connects the removal of the ark
with the assembly of the hosts described in the previous chapter. —
TJie priests and the Levites]. The narrative in 2 S. has no word
concerning the participation of the priests and the Levites. Their
introduction here is due to the point of view of the Chronicler. Ev-
erything must be done according to V.—In their cities that have
pasture lands]. An express provision of the Levitical and priestly
cities was that pasture lands, the immediately adjoining suburbs,
should go with them (Nu. 35' «■, see also Jos. 14^ 22" «■ i Ch.
639 ff. (51 ff., 2 Ch. II").— 3. And let us bring up [lit. round] the arfi
of our God]. The Chronicler varies in his use of terms designating
the ark. In passages independent of Biblical sources he calls it
the arfi of God v. ^ 151. 2. 15. 24 2 Ch. i^ tfie arfi of the covenant of God
i6^ tfie arfi of Yahweh 153- i^- » 16^ 2 Ch. 8" and tfie arfi of the
covenant of Yafiweh 16" 22 '^ 282- '^^ and in the Biblical excerpts he
Xm. 1-14.] FIRST REMOVAL OF THE ARK 205
has allowed to remain unchanged ark of God vv. « ' and the ark of
the covenant of Yahweh 2 Ch. 5- \ and has substituted for the
ark of Yahweh, the ark of God vv. >=• '^ {the ark) ■< 16', and for the
ark of Yahweh, the ark of the covenant of Yahweh 15"- 26. 28. 29^
and the same also for the ark of God 17'. Thus while a tendency
is shown toward preferring the term God to Yahweh, since in no
instances is the ark of Yahweh allowed to stand in a Biblical
extract, yet since this term is used by the Chronicler himself, we
have no real consistency of usage. The preference, however, of
the Dtic. term the ark of the covenant of Yahweh is noticeable. —
For we have not sought it in the days ofSanl] i.e., we have made no
inquiry concerning it (cf. 1 S. 7' ' ). — 5. From Shihor of Egypt].
In Is. 233 Je. 2's Shihor clearly stands for the Nile. The name
properly seems to have been that of an arm or branch of the
delta or canal of the Nile (Shihor, DB., EBi.). In this passage
and the parallel one Jos. 13' the name is more applicable to the
Wady el ' Artsh or the Brook of Egypt, which is elsewhere taken as
the south-western limit of the Promised Land (Nu. 34^ ^ Jos. 15^ "
I K. 8" 2 Ch. 7« Is. 27'2) (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.). Ki. thinks of
the most eastern arm of the Nile delta, Bn., that Shihor is in our
text through careless transcription. Probably at the time of the
Chronicler one thought of the Nile as well as the Wady el ' Arish as
the ideal boundary of the ancient kingdom of Israel {cf. Spurrcll
on Gn. 15'*). — Even unto the entrance of Hamath] the northern
boundary of Israel (Nu. 13=' 34^ Jos. 13^ Jg. 33) identified with the
Beka', a broad valley between Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon watered
by the Orontes, in which was located the city of Hamath, mod.
Hamd. — Kiriath-je arim] a city of the Gibeonites west of Jerusalem
(identification uncertain) {cf. Buhl, GAP. pp. 166/.). The ark
was placed there after its return by the Philistines (i S. 7' ' ). —
6. From this verse to the end of the chapter the narrative is taken
directly from 2 S. 6'-" with few variations (yet a marked one in
V. '^), and the text is on the whole here better preserved than in 2 S.
— Ba'alah] was another name for Kiriath-jearim (Jos. 15'-"- «"
i8'^). The name shows that the place was an ancient sanctuary
or seat of Baal-worship. — Yahweh enthroned above the cherubim
whose name is called over it*] i.e., over the ark; signifying that
'^o6 I CHRONICLES
the ark belonged especially to Yahweh (Oe., Bn., v. i.). This
description of God probably did not belong to the original text
of 2 S. 6^ — 7. New cart] to avoid any possible defilement.
— Abinaddb]. Cf. i S. 7'. In 2 S. 6' the house of Abinadab
is located on a hill and Uzza and Ahio are his sons. The
Chronicler has omitted these particulars and also the verb and
they bore it (IHSll'^l)- — 8. On the instruments of music v. i.,
and cf. i5's- '3- ^*. — 9. Chidon] the name probably of the owner
of the threshing-floor. — 10. That Uzza met his death from some
cause now utterly unknown while the ark was being brought, may
be historical, and the reason assigned would be most natural (cf.
15'^). On the other hand, the story may have originated in an
endeavour to explain the meaning of the local name Perez- uzza
v. ". — 14. And the ark of God abode by the house of Obed-edom
in its own house] i.e., the ark was in its tent alongside or near the
house of Obed-edom. This statement is a modification of that of
2 S. 6" (1;. i.) where the ark is represented as placed in the house
of Obed-edom. The Chronicler, however, evidently could not
conceive of the ark placed in an ordinary dwelling and modified
the text accordingly. On Obed-edom as a Levite cf. i5'8.
1. •>■(■;•] followed by two genitives, cf. 2 Ch. 11' i2'5 Ges. § 128a.
(gB /xeTCL Twv irpea^vTipuv Kal before n'w' is not likely original. —
luj ^3^'\ in short with every leader. For the force of S v. BDB. '^ 5 e
(d). (S^ Kal ixtra iravrbi 7]yov/j.ivov probably had no different underlying
Heb. — 2. ai:a ot"^-; ax], ^-j has here the force of a dat. cf. Ne. 2^- ' Est.
ii' 3' et al. — ij-tiSn mni jc] cf. Gn. 245". — nn'^^i'j nsicj] for the con-
struction V. Ges. § i2oh. (& connects n:i-iDj with previous clause and
renders evu)5d)6T]. This suggests that ^ is corrupt. SS. conjecture
mpj or nxinj Niph. forms, favoured also by Kau., Bn., BDB.; n-iij
Klo., who connects with previous clause and renders laid wir von
Jahve unserm Gotie Gunst dazu erlangen. Ki. BH. after (S reads
nnxij, and from Yahweh our God it is acceptable. Both IJ and &
favour connecting the verb with the previous clause. — U'-nx h'j]. '^>
interchanges with Sn in late Heb. v. BDB. Sn note 2 and hy 8. — nisiN]
this plural of y\t< is almost wholly late (some twenty-two times in 1
and 2 Ch.) used, as here, for districts of Israel, cf. also 2 Ch. 11" 15^,
as well as countries adjoining Israel 14" 22' 29'°, et al. (1. 6). — 3.
injcm] C5 ■i!^'iti'*i^i. J may be a corruption of 1, or vice versa. — 4.
p nvj'i'S] on the use of inf. after lex </. 27" 2 Ch. 21' Ps. 106" Est.
XIV. 1-7.] DAVID IN JERUSALEM 207
4% Ew. § 338 a. — 6. Snis'^ Sdi "in h}!>^] 2 S. 6^ tj-x D>'n •?3i nn 1"?^ opM
IPX. In 2 S. 6' the people who are with David are only thirty
thousand, while according to Ch. v. ^ David has assembled all
Israel. — n•^^n>h . . . nnSya]. The text in 2 S. is corrupt. Ch. prob-
ably preserves the original with the insertion of D^ijJ^ nnp Sx (Bn.).
Bu. in 2 S. (SBOT.) reads ri-^-.n-^ nS>-3. — xipj i!rN D^anon 3a'i> nin^
cr] 2 S. vhy D"'3■^^n ja'^ ms'^s mn^ oir db* f<npj ncN. Both texts
appear faulty. Dr., Bu., after 05, omit Dt^ 2 in 2 S. Kau. substitutes
in Ch. the text of 2 S. with this omission and that of 'ax. Bn.
with Oe., after (S, reads vSj? mz', and thinks the Chronicler changed
the order of 2 S. purposely to avoid placing the ark in close con-
nection with the God of Israel as Yahweh Sabaoth, the God of
War, and instead merely refers to the ark as of Yahzveh . . . whose
name is called over it; the last phrase indicating merely ownership
(for ref. see BDB. I. Nnp Niph. 2. d. (4).). Ki. BH. reads ica*
^z\ — 7. n;'3J3 . . . inxit"! rr^nn in 2 S. 6'- •* are a dittography and to
be struck out. The Chronicler has, however, omitted the remainder
of V. « in 2 S. — 8. Dn^DJi ly Sd3] 2 S. 6^ Dicn3 isy S32. Ch. has
- the true reading. — nnxxnai DTiSsDOi] 2 S. D''SxSxdi DVJJJJcai. The latter
text is the original (Be., Zoe., Dr.). The motive of the change was
to introduce instruments better known or more in use. The anxsn
are often mentioned by the Chronicler (is^''- ^ i6«- <2 2 Ch. s'^'-
i3'-- " 15'* 2o28 et al.) (1. 44). — 9. p^o] 2 S. 6^ has ]13J which as a
part, fixed is meaningless {v. Dr.). — ni nx] wanting in 1^ of 2 S. is
required by Heb. usage (Dr., Bu.). — 2 S. has also tn^M instead of
rnxS. — vjr:u'] read perhaps la^r, see BDB. — 10. Compared with 2 S.
6', whose text is quite corrupt, Ch. has here the original text. — 11.
-in''i] (& Kal rjdijfjLr]<Tev, which is also the rendering of ^ "inn in i S.
15", hence the emendations to "10.11 or "ix^j proposed by Dr., Bu.,
SBOT., do not appear necessary (Sm. on i S. 15")- — T"^fl ""^l 2 S. 6^
V-iD Ti'N ^;. — 12 . □'h'^nh 1 and 2] 2 S. 68 mn\ — -idxS] 2 S. ncxii. — How shall
I bring the ark unto me]. 2 S. " How shall the ark come unto me." —
13. I'Dn] 2 S. 61" no-iS nax. — 14. Before rr-ai of 2 S. 6'" the Chronicler
has inserted aj? and he has also inserted after 'Obed-edom inoa {v. s.).
— iS "ll^'^< Ss nxi dik ij;? no nx]. (B omits nij and 2 S. reads nx
in^a Sd nxi mx naj;.
XIV. David in Jerusalem. — This chapter is taken from 2 S.
5"-". As already remarked, the Chronicler has varied the order
in 2 S., giving the first place to David's removal of the ark, c. 13,
and now the second to his buildings, his family, and his victories.
1. 2. David's assistance in building from Tyre. — The em-
bassy from the Phoenician King with gifts of cedars and skilled
2o8 I CHRONICLES
slaves was a recognition of David's great power, his friendship
being worth cultivating, and this prosperity indicated that God
had established David as king over Israel, for his kingdom was
exalted on high.
1. o-\'n] Qr. has min preferred by Ki. (see his note SBOT.), and
also occurring in 2 Ch. 2"^- •" '• 8^- '» 92'. In S. and K. we have ai^n.
This is what we should expect from a compound of nN, which is
generally seen in Hiram (v. BDB., ai^n after ns; also v. Ahumai 4^).
oninx is, of course, possible like "'nud. — -\>p "'B'-im] 2 S. 5" px 'i:'ini
-i.p — n'3 iS nuaV] 2 S. nnS no M2>\ The Chronicler is fond of
using the inf. of purpose and substitutes it for the ivaw consec. — 2.
■•d] 2 S. 5'^ ''01. It is d fficult to determine whether the omission of the
1 is a slip or intentional by the Chronicler to show why David knew
that Yahweh had established him as king. — raz'i] must be taken as a
Niph. pf. 3. fern, and so 05 of 2 S., where ^ has ins'^DD ncj. The
Chronicler has substituted the common word of late Heb. inioSc, and
also inserted for emphasis n*^;-::^, a phrase peculiar to Ch., to intensify
the verb, cf. 22^ 23" 293- " 2 Ch. i' 2019, with iy 1612 1712 268 (1. 87).
3-7. David's sons born in Jerusalem. {Cf. ^'-^ 2 S. 5'' '^)—
The Chronicler has omitted from 2 S. the mention of the con-
cubines, either as derogatory to David (Bn., but cf. 3O or because
according to 3^ the sons here mentioned were only those of wives
(Be.). The names of the sons correspond to those given in 2 S.,
except as in 3« *>• '* (q. v.) we have the two additional names
Elpelet and Nogah vv. ^b. ea^ and correctly Beeliada {)}Tb)^2)
instead of Eliada (yn^^S), cf 3^
3-7. Besides the omission of D^rjSo before D'C'J, the Chronicler has
omitted the reference to Hebron, but has preserved the true reading
oS^-n^a instead of nSi'n^D. He has also given nn nSn instead of
inS n^n, and also we have in v. * om^v-i, instead of a^-\'^^n, followed
by the additional words vn li's. The retention of mj? (v. ") is
meaningless, since the record 2 S. 32-5, to which it refers, is omitted.
For variation in the names see above.
8-12. David's victory at Baal-perazim. (Cf 2 S. 5"-=')—
The Chronicler follows here very closely the text of 2 S. The only
specially noteworthy variations are his removal at the end of v. '
of the reference to the stronghold, which perhaps he did not under-
XIV. 8-17.J VICTORIES OVER THE PHILISTINES 209
Stand and which in meaning is not perfectly plain (see Sm.); his
substitution of Elohini for Yahweh w. i"- ", and the new statement
in V. '-, q. V. — 8. Over all Israel]. David as King of Judah had
not been a menace to Philistia and it is possible that he thus ruled
with some kind of consent from the Philistines, but they naturally
could not countenance the extension of his power over all Israel.
— 9. In the valley of Rephaim] very near Jerusalem, through which
passes the railway from Jaffa (Baed." p. 15) (GAS. HGHL. p.
218). — 10. Inquired of Yahweh] by the sacred lot, the Urim and
Thummim or the Ephod (r/. Ju. i' i S. 2^- «■ ^'^ 30^ '-.—11. Baal-
perazim] should probably be identified with Mt. Perazim of Is.
28^'. The site is unknown. The meaning is "Lord of breakings."
If the name is not more ancient than David, to wit, that of some
sanctuary of a god, then Baal is equivalent to Yahweh, who, as the
remainder of the verse implies, had given them the victory that
day. — 12. In 2 S. 5^' we read that the Philistines left the images of
their gods and that David and his men took them away. Here we
read that David commanded and the images ivere burned with fire.
The Chronicler could not think of any other disposal of idols by
David than their destruction according to the law, Dt. y^- ".
8. in ncsj] 2 S. 5" in rs in^-o. — S:] wanting in 2 S. — ^nijoS s-i^i]
2 S. niiXDH '^N TIM. Probably the stronghold of Adullam was meant
(Bn.). — 9. rj;:'D-] 2 S. 5'^ u'Jr. This latter is by Ki. preferred. Bn.
says it is impossible to determine which is original. — 10. a^n^vx:i] 2 S.
519 nino. — an.-iji] 2 S. D.-inn. — i'^] 2 S. in Sn. — DTinji] 2 S. i~!< pj "'O
3via''?fln PS, a good illustration of abridgment by the Chronicler.
— 11. iSj?ii] 2 MSS., (6 sg., 2 S. 5=" in N3M. — d'hSni] 2 S. nnv — n-:}]
2 S. ijdS. — 12. an^n'TN ns] 2 S. 5^1 Di^ai-y rs. Ch. supported by
(8 in 2 S. doubtless preserves the original reading (Dr., Bu., Bn., Sm.).
A transcriber of 2 S. refused to call idols gods. — rso \s-\v^^ in icnm]
2 S. VB'jNi in DN-iTii, V. s.
13-17. David's victory over the Philistines in the valley
(= 2 S. 5"-" with the addition of v. ■'). — V. '' has been abridged
with the loss of Repha im, the name of the valley. Elohim, as
above, has been substituted for Yahweh in vv. '^'^ and inserted in
V. '<, giving and God said^ Emphasis has been placed on David's
inquiry of God by inserting the word again. — 13. In the valley]
14
2IO I CHRONICLES
i.e., of Rephaim (v. s.). — 14. Philistines are to be attacked
on flank or rear. — 15. When thou hearesl, etc.]. The omen for
attack was to be the sound of the wind in the trees: the wind was
regarded as a manifestation of Yahweh (cf. 2 S. 22" i K. 19" '•
Jb. 38'). It is not necessary to think that the trees before this
event were regarded as sacred. — 16. From Gibe' on even to Gezer].
The former (cf. 8") indicates the quarter of attack and the latter
(cf. 6" "") the Canaanitish city the probable place of refuge
and escape of the Philistines. The distance is some sixteen
miles. This scene of the battle may account for the Chronicler's
omission of Rephaim in v. ". — 17. The Chronicler has given an
exaggerated significance to this victory quite in the line of his
desire to glorify David.
13. 2 S. 5« has r\^hyh after D^ntt'Sfl and waji instead of latfA'' (see
V. ») with D^NDi after pv;. — 14. (V. s.) DniS>'D 3Dn onnnN n^yn ith] 2 S.
5" annnx Sn 2Dn 7\);-;n ah. The text of 2 S. is preferable. A frontal
attack is forbidden and one commanded on the rear. Chronicles gives
the wrong connection to D.T>-\nN, and yet adapted it probably by changing
its force from behind them to that of following in a straight direction
afler them. on^Sya is either an original addition of the Chronicler, or
possibly the original of 2 S. was sn>^}) n'^yn nS and we have by over-
sight in Chronicles an interchange of prepositions (Be., Bn.). — In both
texts read 3D instead of 3Dn (Dr., Bu., Ki., BDB.). — 15. ncnSoa Nsn tn]
" paraphrase with much loss of originality and vigor " of 2 S. 5'* IK
V"in.-i. — 16. 'd njno nt< ^T^] 2 S. 525 'd ns i>i. — pyajD] 2 S. j?3jd. The
former is the true reading, cf. Is. 28=' " where Perazim and Gibeon are
mentioned together as scenes of celebrated victories. The Philistines
are in the D^ndi pay south of Jerusalem. David advancing from the
south does not approach them in front, but makes a circuit and assails
their rear. From Gibeon, on the north-west of Jerusalem, would thus
just indicate the quarter from which his attack would be made " (Dr.).
XV.-XVI. The bringing of the ark to the city of David. —
This narrative differs, especially in its elaboration, from the paral-
lel in 2 S. 6'=". In 2 S. the impulse for the second removal of the
ark is derived from the blessing which the ark had brought to the
house of Obed-edom and which had taken away the fear of the
King (v. "», cf. V. 8), and the removal itself is described as per-
formed by the King and the people without the mention of a priest
XV. 1-24.] PREPARATIONS FOR REMOVAL OF ARK 21 1
or a Levite. In Chronicles, on the other hand, this blessing of the
house of Obed-edom is mentioned only incidentally (i3'< = 2 S. 6"j
and is not made the motive which led David to carry out his original
intention of bringing the ark to Jerusalem. The King, apparently
having realised that the failure of the first attempt was due to a
non-compliance with the Levitical law, now proceeds to bring up
the ark with due ecclesiastical state and ceremony.
If we exclude 15"-"- "• ^*^ and in 16^ the words, and Obed-edom and
Jeiel . . . and Asaph (v. i.), the narrative runs smoothly and is probably
the composition of the Chronicler. The sixfold division of the Levites
(vv. '-"') is somewhat peculiar and has been given as the ground for
assigning 15'-" to an older source (so Bn., Ki.), but the text does not
imply that Elizaphan, Hebron, and Uzziel were co-ordinated with Kehath,
Merari, and Gershon as sons of Levi. Subordinate members of a family
might have become heads of classes beside those named after their
forefathers {cf. 2 Ch. 29" ^ ). According to Nu. t,^"'- the family of
' Elizaphan, the son of Uzziel, had charge of the ark and in the light of
Nu. 4'* where the transportation of the sacred utensils is committed to
the sons of Kehath only, it is surprising that the descendants of any but
this family should be represented. The tradition that there were only
three sons of Levi was firmly established by the time of P (see on 5"
(6')). Hence we think it simpler to suppose that the Chronicler himself
introduced the representatives of the three great divisions of the Levites
beside those from the family of Kehath. These men with their brethren
do not represent necessarily all the Levites, but merely those assigned
to this task, which accounts for the small number.
The Psalm fragments (i65s) may be later interpolations (Hitzig,
Reuss, Bn.) or more probably they were introduced by the Chronicler
(Ki. Kom. p. 70).
The evidence that 1519-21. 23 ^^g added later, is as follows: (i) The
corrected text of v. " {v. i.) refers to twelve singers whose names are
found to that number, followed by the names of two gate-keepers, but
in vv. 20 f the whole number are classified as singers, including the
well-known gate-keeper Obed-edom {cf. 15-^ i63' 26^- « s. is) and
one new name Azaziah {v. i.). (2) Although the Chronicler gives
lists of singers elsewhere, he never classifies them according to their
instruments (except 16^ v. i.). (3) The phrase nicSj? Sy (v. 29) is
found elsewhere only in the titles of Pss. (9' 46' 481^ f, see BDB.), and
the same is true of nijiDB'n hy (v. 21, cf. Ps. 6' 12' f)- nsj::'^ precedes
the latter in both Pss. cited, and in Chronicles mh follows the phrase.
If the Chronicler had been interested in these musical terms, we should
expect them elsewhere in a narrative so replete with references to the
212 I CHRONICLES
singers. (4) The notice concerning the elsewhere unknown gate-
keepers (v. ") seems to take the place of the two in v. ". On the
other hand, v. " may have come from the Chronicler, since he knows
a Chenaniah, a Kehathite (26='), who would be a suitable /Jr/Hce 0/ the
carrying. The Chronicler thought the singers needed instruction (25'),
and he might well have thought the bearers of the ark also required
directions after the ill-fated ending of the first attempt (13'°). Either
the reference to Chenaniah in v. -' is also secondary or v. -- is from
the Chronicler.
The development of i5i6-2« seems to have been somewhat as follows:
The Chronicler wrote vv. '«-'8- 22. 24a. An interpolator interested in the
classification of singers according to musical instruments added vv.
"■-' taking all the names except Azaziah from the preceding lists. He
found the text of v. '^ in its present corrupt form (v. i.) and so concluded
that all the names were those of singers. There is no indication in the
present text of v. '* that Mikneiah concludes the list of the singers.
Then, supposing the names of the gate-keepers to have fallen out after
Dni'v^n (v. '8), he added two gate-keepers (v. ^^), probably appropriating
the names from 9'^. The final clause of v. ^* originated in a marginal
gloss contradicting the statement in v. ".
The interpolator of vv. •5-21. 23 q\s,o inserted the words, and Obed-edom
and Jeiel, and Asaph into 16'. Obed-edom and Jeiel were added
since otherwise only one harp-player would have been mentioned {cf.
15-') and the insertion of and Asaph assigns to him the cymbals as in
15". Since the phrase, Obed-edom also the son of Jeduthun, in 16^8
is probably a gloss (v. i.), there is every reason to doubt that Obed-edom
was known to the Chronicler as anything but a gate-keeper, and since
his position as a singer (1521 i65) rests in all likelihood upon the inter-
polator's misunderstanding of 15", there is little probability that in
history the family of Obed-edom were ever atiything except gate-keepers.
XV. 1-15. The general preparation for bringing up the
ark. — These verses have no direct parallel in 2 S. Six Levites
were assigned the task of carrying the ark, the Chronicler possibly
thinking of a representative of each of the three great classes of
the Levites as at one end and three representatives of the Kehath-
ites at the other. The two priests who were appointed doubtless
had the task of covering the ark (cf. Nu. 4'^). These were
commanded to sanctify themselves. — 1. And he made for himself
houses]. The reference is either to the erection of other build-
ings besides the palace which David had built with the assist-
ance of Hiram (14') (Be.) or to the internal construction of the
XV. 1-24.] PREPARATIONS FOR REMOVAL OF ARK 213
palace as a residence for wives and children (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). —
And he prepared a place for the ark God], Some kind of a
permanent enclosure is clearly meant where a tent could be
erected for the ark. The old tabernacle, according to Chron-
icles, was at Gibeon (2 Ch. i^, cf. i Ch. 16^^ 2129). — 2. Then]
i.e., after the ark had been three months in the house of Obed-
edom (13'^) (Be., Ke., Zoe.), or better after the preparation
mentioned in v. ' when, according to the writer, David is ready
to renew the attempt to bring up the ark. — The observation ab )Ut
the Levites is made in view of the death of Uzza (13'°). It is i n-
plied that the Law had not been observed in carrying the ark on
a cart (13'). For the law cf. Nu. i^" 41= 73 10". — 3. This sla e-
ment or its equivalent is lacking in 2 S., although such an assembV
might be inferred from 2 S. 6'^ where all Israel is mentioned.- -6.
Uri'el]. The name occurs in the Kehathite genealogy of Elkaaih
6' "<>. He is mentioned first because the Kehathites had tae
duty of carrying the furniture of the sanctuary, Nu. 4^'=. — 6.
'AsaiaJi]. A Merarite of this name with his genealogy is mentioned
in 6" "°>. — 7. Jo'el]. One of this name is mentioned in 23^ as a
son of the Gershonite Ladan and the head of a family. — 8. Eliza-
phan]. Cf. 2 Ch. 29'' where Elizaphan also represents adivision
of the Levites. In Nu. 3" the prince of the Kehathites is Elizaphan
the son of Uzziel. — Shetnaiah] a name of frequent occurrence
{cf. 9"). — 9. Hebron] a son of Kehath in 52^ (6^) 6^ <'«' 23'^ Ex.
6' 8 Nu. 3'^ — Eli' el] in the genealogy of Heman 6'' <"' and the
name of a Levitical overseer appointed by Hezekiah 2 Ch. 31",
elsewhere in Chronicles as the name of non-Levites cf. 5^^ S^"* -••
ii-« •• i2'2 t">. — 10. Uzzi'el] like Hebron a son of Kehath in pas-
sages given above v. ' — ' Amminadab] the name of a son of Kehath
in 6' <") but there the name is a textual error for Izhar. — 11.. Zadok
and Ahiathar the priests]. This double priesthood is mentioned
in 2 S. 8" {cf. I Ch. iS'* for true text) 15"- ss i^u 20^6 and came
to an end in the reign of Solomon when Abiathar was deposed
(i K. 2"- "). — 12. Of the Levites] is here used in the general
sense, including the priests, cf. v. '^ — Sanctify yourselves] {cf.
2 Ch. 5" 295- >5- 3< 30'- >«• 24 -^jis 25«) by the v/ashing of the
body and the garments and the keeping aloof from every defile-
214 I CHRONICLES
ment, avoiding sexual intercourse (r/. Gn. 35' Ex. ig'"- '<■ 's- »i).
— Unto the place which I have prepared for it\ Cf. w. '• «.
On the construction see textual note. — 13. The verb bear (StT^)
may be supplied in the first clause (Oe., RV., cf. v. =; ')^ has
prasentes, on (g v. i.). — Made a breach upon us\ Cf. 13". — For
we did tiot seek it (or him) aright]. The text is ambiguous, the
pronominal object of the verb may either refer to the ark as in
13= (q. V.) (Ba.) or to God (Ke., Zoe., Oe., and most). The
former, however, is to be preferred : We did not search out and
bring up the ark in the right way. — 14. David's request is com-
plied with. — 15. Upon their shoulders]. Cf. Nu. i'" 79, but see
text. n.
1. ^v;'] is here taken with the force of -ja by Be., Kau., Ki., while
Ke., Zoe., Oe. give the force to prepare (see ni:-;- BDB. II. 3). — 2. pnt"']
on use of inf. cf. Ges. § 114/. — 7. s:;n.;] read P-'-'J, see on 6'. — 12.
1*7 ■>.nir;.-i Sn-] equivalent to 'ui 'dt ov^ '^n Ex. 232°. On the omission
of the relative see Ges. § 156?? (d), Dav. §§ 144, 145 Rem. 5, Ew. §
2,T)T) b; for the same construction where preposition precedes verb 2 Ch.
i^ and very similar i Ch. 29' 2 Ch. i65 3o'8f . — 13. ^Jl^'^«^3DS] apparently
a combination of n::'^ and nr^-Nn^, the union being formed as in the case
of nr: with short words, ht:: E.x. 42, cj*^:: Is. 3", hn'ttc Mai. i" (Be.).
nsS then has the force of Tw'S Sy wherefore, because, Ew. § 353 a, Koe.
ii. §§2. 389h. Hence Kau. renders the clause : Weil ihr das erste Mai
nicht ziigegen ivart. BDB. (under no i. e) renders: Because ye were
not (employed) /or what was at first. Ki. retains the interrogative force
and renders: Warum wart ihr dock bisher nicht da? 05^ reads Sri ovk
iv Tcp irpbrepov ifxas elvai eroZ/uous (^ omits eroi^vs). Bn. then re-
gards ll^ as a corruption and reads 'la D'j13J d.~x n't >d.- — 15. aDnj2]
is wanting in (&^^ and hence is regarded as a gloss derived from 1P33 in
Nu. 7' by Bn., Ki. — In P the carrying staves of the ark are ana Ex.
25" "• Nu. 4^ et al., ai3 the frame or flat surface on which the utensils
of the sanctuary were carried Nu. 4"'- ^^, also the grapes of Eschol Nu.
13", see Gray, Com. in locis. — an^S;*]. The sufl&x refers to the implied
pi. in Dsno.
16-24. The musical arrangements for bringing up the ark.
— On the composite character of this section, see above. — 16. And
Dav-id comjnanded] expresses the Heb. idiom more nearly than the
spake to of EVs. (v. i.). — The chiefs of the Levites]. The reference
may be to the six enumerated in w. s-'" repeated in v. ". — With
XV. 1-24.] PREPARATIONS FOR REMOVAL OF ARK
215
psalteries and harps and cymbals]. These three instruments are
often mentioned together by the Chronicler v. '» 138 166 2 Ch. 5"
29" Ne. 12". The c_yw6t;/5 expressed by wmVto^'iw are mentioned
only in Chronicles. In 2 S. 6^ Ps. 150' the Heb. word for cymbals
is zelzelim (cf. 138), although we cannot distinguish between the
instruments (Now, Arch. I. pp. 272 /".). — 17. On the three singers,
Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, cf. 6'«-=» ("-•'> 25' ff-. — 18. Their
brethren twelve] should be read instead of their brethren of the sec-
ond degree (v. i.). The singers here mentioned are given again in
vv. 'o '• and in part in 16^ {v. s.). — Zechariah] has been identified
with the Zechariah of 9^' 262- '< {EBi. IV. col. 5390). The name is
an Asaphite, probably family, name in 2 Ch. 20'^ Ne. 12"- *\ —
The following Ben, wanting in v. 20 j^s^ should be read Bani
(v. i.). A Bani appears in the line of descent of the singer Ethan
(631 (46)) and as an Asaphite (Ne. 11"). — 'Uzzi'el*] (so read also
in V. " 16^ instead of 'Azi'el, Jei'el) the name also of a musician,
a son of Heman, in 25% and of a son of Jeduthun in 2 Ch. 29'*. —
Shemiramoth]. A Levite of this name appears also in 2 Ch. 17' f.
— Jehi'el] the name of a son of Heman 2 Ch. 29'< Qr., also else-
where frequent. — 'Unni] wanting in 16^, a Levite in Ne. 12' Qr. •}•.
— ElVab] a frequent name, not elsewhere of a musician. — Beniah]
in an Asaphite pedigree 2 Ch. 20'^. — Ma'aseiah] wanting in i6^ —
Mattithiah]. Cf. 9=', a son of Jeduthun 253- ='. — Eliphelehu f and
Mikneiah f ] both wanting in i6\ — ' Obed-edom]. This historical
Philistine caretaker of the ark, a native of Gath, 2 S. 6"' '•, is trans-
formed by the Chronicler, or the school which he represents, into
a Levite of the division of the gate-keepers, v. ■* it^^ 26* « , and as a
Korahite gate-keeper (26'- *), he is a Kehathite. On his appearance
as a singer see above and on i6^^. — Je'tel] a name of frequent oc-
currence; in an Asaphite genealogy 2 Ch. 20'^. The name is
doubtless used for the same individual as Jehiah (v. ^*) but which
is correct cannot be determined. — The gate-keepers] i.e., Obed-edom
and Jeiel, cf. 9" «■. With the Chronicler both singers and gate-
keepers are fully recognised as Levites. — 19-21. The singers are
now divided into three divisions according to their musical parts.
— With cymbals]. Cf. v. '^ These instruments fell to the con-
ductors to mark the time (art. Music, DB.). — To sound aloud]
2l6 I CHRONICLES
perhaps equivalent to beating time (Ke., Zoe.). — With psaheries].
Cf. V. '% stringed instruments perhaps not unhke the Greek lyre.
—Set to'Alamoth ] lit. to (the voice of) young women, i.e., in soprano
{cf. Ps. 46' 48'^ BDB. nc^y). The phrase is obscure. Kau.
and Ki. refuse to translate. — Azaziah] wanting in v. '» and 165,
hence may not be original. — With harps]. CJ. v. '«, stringed
instruments whose difference from the psalteries is not entirely
clear, but they were probably more harp-like. — Set to the Sheminith
lit. upon the eighth, i.e., prob. to a deep octave or in the bass,
(f. Ps. 6' 12'. — To lead]. The musicians led the service of song.
— 22. Chenaniah]. Cf. v.", the name also occurs of Levites in
26" and as Conaniah, which Ki. after (g prefers here, 2 Ch. 31'^ '•
35'. — Chief of the Levites in the carrying] i.e., he had charge of the
duty of carrying the sacred furniture and directed the carrying
(of the ark) because he was skilful. This is the usual interpreta-
tion, but the word niassa, meaning bearing, carrying, uplifting, is
rendered uplifting of the voice, song, by ($, EVs., Oe. (U prophetia).
— 23. Berechiah]. For the occurrence of the name in kindred lists
cf. v. " 6=^ "9) c)"!. — Elkanah]. Cf. as above q'^. Elkanah,
derived from the father of Samuel, appears in the genealogy of
Heman, cf. 6'"-'- (=5-27). 19-21 (34-36). The introduction of two gate-
keepers here in addition to those of vv. '« ■* is striking and suggests
that this section is composite. — 24. Shebaniah] also the nam^e of a
priest in Ne. lo^ '^' i2'4, and of Levites in Ne. 9^ '• 10'° and per-
haps I Ch. 24" f. — Joshaphat] an abbreviated form of Jehosha-
phat. Neither name occurs elsewhere as that of either a priest
or a Levite. — Nethan'el] the name of priests in Ezr. 10=2 ]sj"e. 1221,
of Levites in 26^ 2 Ch. 35" Ne. 1235. — 'Amasai] not elsewhere a
priest's name, but in the genealogy of the Kehathite Heman, 6'"
(25). 20 (35)^ and of the Kehathite Mahath, 2 Ch. 29'=. — Zcchariah]
not elsewhere the name of a priest; of Levites see v. '5. — Benaiah]
not elsewhere as a priest's name; as Levite see v. '^ — Eli'ezer] a
priest's name in Ezr. 10' ^ — Sounded with trumpets] (hazozeroth
ril"lVl»n) the long straight metal horns with flaring mouths,
mentioned almost entirely as a sacred instrument (v. =« j-^s 2 Ch.
15'^ 2o!'8 2926- 27 -^zr. 3'" Ne. i2'6- 41 espec. Nu. lo^-s) in distinction
from the shophar, the curved horn of a cow or ram used in early
XV. 1-24.] PREPARATIONS FOR REMOVAL OF ARK 217
Israel especially in signals of war (Ju. 3" 6=< 7' i S. 13' 2 S. 2^^, etc.),
but also by the priests (Jos. 6* Lv. 25'). The seven priestly
trumpeters before the ark were doubtless suggested by Jos. 6*. — '
'Obed-edom and Je'i'el* were gate-keepers for the ark] a curious
repetition from v. " {q. v.), probably a gloss.
16. I'txm] a late use of its with the force command followed by inf.
+ ^7 of pers. (1. 4), cf. 2 Ch. 14^ 29^' 31' Est. i'"; so Kau., Ki. — n^cy.T?]
inf. instead of the direct discourse in older writings, Ew. § 338 a, cf.
134 27" 2 Ch. i". — a^->n^] inf. expressing means, Ew. § 280 d, Ges. §
1 140. — h)p2]. On use of 2 cf. Ew. § 282 d, Ges. § 1195', BDB. 3
III. 4. — nnci:''^] S should be struck out: a dittography. — 17. in>a'ip]
(JB Keuralov, (^^^ Kicralov, hence with reference also to 'tr'^p 6" we
should read iniB'-'p (Ki.). — 18. n-'ji'Dn oninN dhd;?!] □•'jti'C occurs else-
where only in i S. 15' and Ezr. i'", where the text is corrupt in both
places (see BDB. njs'c and authorities there cited), hence is suspicious.
After subtracting the two gate-keepers, the following list contains twelve
names. Accordingly we conjecture that the original read an^ns Dnc>n
•\'y; ciZf, and with them their brethren twelve, the first two consonants
of D^JBTH having come in by dittography caused iti'j? to fall out. —
S.\"rj.'M J3 inn3i] j3 is wanting in <&, v. '•", and 16^, but it would naturally
be omitted before the copulative, since it is used nowhere as a proper
name. Probably 1 and ■> have been trans-oosed and the copulative
before the resulting ij3 has been .onnecte'' with the preceding word,
accordingly read '?i<TJ^ ^J3i nnrr. The spellings of tli? first and of
the last of these names are supported by v. ^^ ''"Jni'i ni-i^r and partially
by 16^ Vn'^^ nnat (q. v.). — 3n^'?n] withe ut "> suggests some disturbance
of the text (see Ki. SBOT.). 05 has 1. The preceding name is dubious,
cf. <S.— 19. rii-n:]. On constr.. Dr. TH. 188, Ges. § iT,id.—22.
in\j;:] dB^L have Ewvevia, 'Kosvevia, Iex<"'"*, hence Ki. reads
in<:ji3. — Nii'Dai] wanting in <&, and so omitted by Ki., Bn. — Ntt'ca id-]
(g dpx(^v tQv (jjSwv, N'j'an •\z' followed by Ki., Bn., the former ren-
dering NiVD with reference to carrying the ark, the latter being un-
certain, V. s. — 1L-1] mf. abs. Oe. regards it as a noun or ptc. — 24. onxxnc]
Hiph. ptc. from denom. issn Kt. D''-)xi;nrj Ges. § 530 (for Dnxnxnc
Stade, Gram. 280) or onxxna Baer, also BDB. Qr. nnxriD Ges. § 530,
Baer, Koe. i. § 305 e). Cf. 2 Ch. 5'^ 7« 13 ^928, Piel 2 Ch. 5" f (1- 44)-
— n^n''] read after v. '^ Sn'J.'\
Following the clue of 16* Bn. and Ki. give the original of w. '"• as
follows: The Levites appointed AsLi)h the son of Berechiah the chief
and Zechariah the second in rank, then Uzziel, and Shemiramoth, Jehiel,
Eliab, Beniah, Mattithiah, and Obed-edom and Jeiel, the gate-keepers.
2l8 I CHRONICLES
The names omitted are regarded as coming from a later annotator who
has also added vv. i'-""; v. ■*^ is a still later gloss (but see above).
25-XVI. 3. The bringing up of the ark.— The Chronicler
took these verses from 2 S. 6^'^-^^, making such akerations as were
necessary according to his view of the affair, which is shown in the
preceding passage. — 25. So David, etc.]. The connection is with
V. » after the details concerning the preparation have intervened.
2 S. makes no mention of the elders of Israel and the captains of
thousands. — The ark of the covenant 0/ Yahweh] in 2 S. "the ark
of God" or "the ark of Yahweh," cf. w. "• «« '• with 2 S. 6'=- '»•
••• •'. This change is a touch of the school of the Chronicler, cf.
13'. — 26. When God helped the Levites]. The Chronicler piously
introduces the divine agency as the cause of the auspicious begin-
ning of their undertaking. 2 S. has "when they that bare the ark
had gone six paces." — That they sacrificed seven bullocks and seven
rams]. According to 2 S. David is the sacrificer and the sacrifice
is "an ox and a fatling." Ke. and Zoe. harmonise the passages
by making them refer to two distinct occasions, 2 S. describing the
start and i Ch. the conclusion of the journey. But the sacrifices
of the conclusion are mentioned in 16'. Ba. points out that the
small offering of 2 S. is represented as David's and the large one
of Chronicles as that of the King and his elders. For special
sacrifices consisting of the same numbers of the same animals cf.
Jb. 42« Nu. 23'- ", also 2 Ch. 292". — 27. With a robe of byssus].
Not only David but also the Levites and singers are represented
as wearing processional robes of white linen. — And tipon David
was an ephod of linen] from 2 S. is perhaps a gloss. According
to 2 S. David wore only an ephod, which was a scant skirt or kilt,
and thus he was liable to shameful exposure {EBi. II. col. 1306)
2 S. 6'< 2°. According to the Chronicler, David wears the priestly
robe. The Chronicler omits all reference to David's dancing
save incidentally in v. ". The scandal of the exposure of his per-
son is passed over in silence. — 28. 2 S. mentions David along with
Israel and introduces only one musical instrument, the shophar
or horn (cf. v. ''*) occurring in Chronicles only here. On the other
instruments, the addition to the text of 2 S., cf. v\'. "-^i- ^*. — 29.
I
XV. 25-XVI. 3.] SECOND REMOVAL OF THE ARK 219
It is a mark of the unskilful art of the Chronicler that this single
verse of the episode of Michal's judgment on David should be
here introduced when the story as a whole with its reflection on
David is omitted. — 1. Peace-offerings^ were largely eaten by the
worshippers; hence indicative of feasting. — 2. He blessed the
people]. The king as well as the priest exercised this function;
cf. Solomon's blessing (i K. 8") omitted by the Chronicler
(2 Ch. 7' « ). — 3. A portion] uncertain whether of flesh or wine
{v. i).
25. aio'^nn] strike out n, a dittography, so Kau., Ki. — aiN— 13;'] 2 S.
6'= + nn niy which is superfluous here, cf. v. '. — 27. S^idc] either a
denom. verb from BAram. nSjid Dn. 3-' or from V^s with n inserted,
BDB. Be. thought \^2 S^ycz Sjji^-d a corruption of ij7 Soj -idijd (as
in 2 S. 6") through illegibility, and this emendation is accepted by BDB.
{v. 1*10 p. loi). More Hkely tlie change was intentional, as the omission
of nini "'jd'^ would show. The statement also that "the Levites that
bare the ark " danced would then be inappropriate, while a description
of their sacred vestures is a natural touch of the Chronicler. — itrn].
Either the art. is to be omitted or read NS'C3 instead of Nccn, cf. v. ".
— onTJ'cn^] is an explanatory gloss (Zoe., Bn.) by a reader who under-
stood nz'T^ri to refer to the lifting up of the voice in song, cf. v. "
(Kau.). — 29. ^^'1] 2 S. 6'« nim. The latter is striking in pre-exilic
literature. Dr. TH. 133, Dav. § 58 c, and is probably a corruption.
— K3]. On the perfect cf. Dr. TH. 165. — pnu'Ci ipi"] instead of
n3"\3Ci TiDO in 2 S., a substitution made either to suggest a more
dignified movement or because more intelligible, ioidd is an dTr. Xey.
and iron a 5is \ey. — XVI. 1. D^nS^ni- 2] 2 S. 6" r\^r\\ cf. 13'. —
After i.-iN 2 S. has iniiica. — 'ui ni'^jj nnpM] 2 S. nini ■'jdS r^hv; Syn
D-'DStri. — 2. nin>] 2 S. 6'8 + nixas, cf. 136. — 3. The Chronicler con-
denses '^NTJ'^ pen ^ih a>'n SjS of 2 S. 6^^ into Sxiu'i r^x S3S. — -13:]
(the ordinary word for loaf, Ju. 8= i S. 2^5 10' Pr. 6^6 Je. 3721) 2 S. nSn
elsewhere only in P of a sacrificial cake, implying that the people
received cakes connected with the peace-offerings. — 2 S. has in 1^,
not 05, the numeral, rns, nns, with each gift. — The exact meaning
of iDU'N ctTT. Xe7. is unknown; the renderings in the Vrss. vary (for full
discussion cf. Dr. TS., pp. 207/.).
XVI. 4-6. The Levites appointed for service before the ark.
— These verses are original with the Chronicler with the omission
of the words, and Obed-edom and Jeiel, and Asaph, from v. «
iy. s.). The appointees already mentioned (15'' ^ ) were set aside
220 I CHRONICLES
merely for the purpose of l^ringing the ark in state to Jerusalem.
They consisted of three chief singers with twelve of their brethren
and seven priests. Here we have only one chief singer with seven
of his brethren and two priests. The reason for this reduction in
the numbers is to be sought in \^. ^^ «•. The Chronicler thought
the tabernacle with the altar of burnt-offering was at Gibeon at this
time. The occasion of bringing up the ark to Jerusalem was so
important as to call for the participation of all the priests and
Levites. When this had been accomplished, they were divided
for service in both places. Asaph and seven of his brethren were
assigned to service before the ark in Jerusalem, while Heman
and Jeduthun and the rest of those mentioned by name (v. «•)
were appointed to the worship in the tabernacle at Gibeon. Only
two priests were appointed for services as trumpeters before the
ark. Thus the reductions are not in the same proportion. We
should expect Asaph with but four of his brethren. The number
two for the priests may have been suggested by 15" or Nu. 10' 2,
while a large numl^er of priests was indispensable at the altar of
burnt-offering. Since the service before the ark is represented
as of a musical character entirely, the larger number of singers
appointed to th?t service is accounted for, also the number seven
may have influenced the Chronicler {cf. 15").
4. The adminir>tration of the Levites was one of prayer and
song as is implied by the following words, both to commemorate
and to thank and to praise Yahiveh the God of Israel. These in-
dicate three forms of service, the first a liturgical prayer at the
presentation of that part of the meal-offering which was burnt,
i. e., the memorial {cf. Lv. 2-- '■ '^ ^u 53 <.w ]sju. 5^6 and
explanations of the titles of Pss. 38 and 70 espec. Briggs, Psalms,
i. Intro. § 39 (6)); the second refers to the use of Psalms that
prominently confess and give thanks to God; and the third to
praises like those of the Hallelujah songs (Zoe.). The Levites
were assigned the duty "to thank and to praise Yahweh" at the
daily burnt-offerings and at all burnt-offerings (23^0 f) of which
the meal-offering constituted a part (Nu. 28' ^■), hence all three
of these liturgical forms are connected with the burnt-offering.
Since the Chronicler represents that no regular sacrifices were
XVI. 4-36.] SERVICE OF SONG BEFORE THE ARK 221
made in Jerusalem at this time {cf. 21=" «•), it may be inferred that
these Levites were to conduct the musical liturgy before the ark
at the same time that the offerings were being made on the altar at
Gibcon with corresponding musical service. The two priests also
(v. «) sounded the two silver trumpets as if present at the burnt-
offerings (2 Ch. 2926-28 Nu. lo'- 2- 10). — 6. Jahazi'el] does not ap-
pear in 152^ For occurrences of the name cf. 12^ '■*^'> 23'^ Ezr. S\
4. p-iN] (S + nn^. — 5. Sni;;^'] read ''N''!"! as also in i5'8- 20 q. v.,
so Ki. — SN^i'^2] jn 1524 n^n^ but cf. i$^K
7. An interesting statement showing that Psalms of thanksgiving
(Hodii Psalms) were assigned to a particular class of singers
(Bn.).
8-36. A Psalm of thanksgiving. — This is a compilation from
verses found in the Psalter, vv. 8-"=Ps_ io5'-'5, w."-33=Ps. 96,
w. 31-36 =Ps. 106' " "_ The variations from the text of the Psalter
are slight. The original place of these verses was in the Psalter,
since vv. 8-22 are clearly a fragment of Ps. 105. (This is now
universally admitted, although Hitz. and Ke. held the original
place to have been in Ch.) Hence, since v. ^^ corresponding to
Ps. 106^8^ is the doxology marking the close of the fourth book
of the Psalter, it is a fair and usual inference that the Psalter had
already been arranged in five books at the time of the Chronicler.
Yet it may be further said that if the small fragment vv. ^*-''*
existed independently of Ps. 106 (so Cheyne), and if the whole
section, w. '-=«, is an insertion of a later date than the period of
the Chronicler (so Bn.), this inference cannot be made.
8-22 = Ps. 105' -15. According to Briggs, the first five verses
are an introductory gloss, making the Ps. into a Hallel. — 8. 9.
Two tetrameter synthetic couplets :
Give thanks unto Yahweh, call upon his name;
Proclaim among the peoples his doings.
Sing unto him, make music for him;
Muse upon all his wondrous deeds.
The Hebrew shows assonance between the first and third, and the
second and fourth lines, these ending in the sounds 0 and au re-
222 I CHRONICLES
spectively. Each couplet consists of three clauses, the first two short
composing one line, and the third a tetrameter and so a line by it-
self. In the first couplet the first clause calls upon the worshipper
to pay divine honours, the second clause is a stronger repetition of
this call, and the third commands him to proclaim the deeds of
his God among the peoples; in the second couplet the movement
is similar. — Call upon his name] may also be rendered "proclaim
his name," which is preferred by Briggs, but the former is better
suited to the structure of the stanza. The second couplet shows
that this clause strengthens the preceding command instead of
anticipating the following. — Make music for him]. The verb
("IDT) may either mean to sing to (?) God, Ps. 27^ loi' 104'^
also here according to BDB., or it may be used of playing musical
instruments, Ps. ^^^ cj. 144' (parallel to m''wN'), 71'' 98^ 147'
1493. The parallelism of Ps. 144' suggests that the latter meaning
may have been intended here, so Briggs. — These two cou})lets
are based upon Is. 12* ' , which reads as follows :
"Give thanks unto Yahweh, call upon his name;
Proclaim among the peoples his doings.
Commemorate for his name is exalted,
IMake music (lltiT) unto Yahweh for he hath
done excellent things,
Let this be known in all the earth."
The first two lines were taken verbatim; the last three were re-
duced to the same form as the first two. The words "in all the
earth" — parallel to "among the peoples" — may have been origi-
nal in Ps., but not in Chronicles. — 10. Glory in his holy name]
i.e., his name as sacred and separate from all defilement. — Of
them that seek Yahweh]. Briggs substitutes as original the per-
sonal pronoun, him, instead of the divine name for the sake of
the assonance. — 11. Seek his face continually] that you may
gain knowledge of his greatness, even as when men sought the
face of an earthly king, i K. io=^ — No assonance appears in this
verse, but in 12 there is an apparently intentional resemblance of
sound {niphWothau . . . mophethau) in the midst of the lines
instead of at the ends. — Commemorate] celebrate by recounting,
XVI. 4-36.] SERVICE OF SONG BEFORE THE ARK 223
His wondrous deeds which he has done] and his marvels] espec.
the miracles of the Exodus, rf. Ps. 105". This is done in Pss.
105 and 106, but most of these wonders of Hebrew history are
omitted here. — 13. The original text of Ps. probably read, "Ye
seed of Abraham, his servant, Ye sons of Jacob, his chosen one"
(so Briggs), which in Chronicles has become. Ye seed of Israel,
his servant (pi. in (B is not likely original). Ye sons of Jacob, his
chosen ones. The Chronicler copied the pronominal suffixes from
the present text of Ps., where the assonance has been destroyed
by a copyist's misunderstanding, by which the plural his chosen
ones, i.e., the sons of Jacob, has been substituted for the singular
his chosen one, i.e., Jacob rather than Esau (Briggs). Israel was
doubtless substituted for Abraham, since it makes a more obvious,
though less poetic, parallel, cf v. i". — 14. He, Yahweh, is our God;
Jn all the earth are his judgiuents] an assertion of the world-wide
rule of Yahweh. — 15-22. The Psalmist then recalls the covenant
which Yahweh made with the three patriarchs in turn, with
Abraham] Gn. 15, 17, 22'6-i8^ his oath unto Isaac], On. 26--^ unto
Jacob for a statute], Gn. 28'3-'5, and to Israel for an everlasting
covenant], Gn. 35'"'^; and how when they were but a few in num-
ber (so read instead of ye, v. i.), cf. Gn. 343", he suffered no man to
wrong them], as in the relation of Abraham to the Canaanites, of
Isaac to the men of Gerar, of Jacob to Laban and to Esau, and
reproved kings for their sokes], Pharaoh Gn. 12", and Abimelech
Gn. 203-7. The patriarchs are represented as anointed kings only
here and in the parallel Ps. In Gn. 20' (E), Abraham is termed
a prophet. — 23-33 = Ps. 96"' ^'--s- '"b "» '"^ nb-isb, The strong
beginning of Ps. 96 is weakened by omitting vv. ^^ ^a^ since they
are inappropriate here (Be.). In these verses an appeal is made to
all the earth (v. "), and Yahweh is proclaimed as the one efficient
God who alone has done wondrous deeds among all peoples (v. =^).
He is contrasted with the gods of other peoples which are things of
nought and have done nothing for their worshippers, cf. Is. 40' « a-
443 a- Je. 2" Ps. 115^-^ while Yahweh made the heavens (v. =«).
All peoples are admonished to bring offerings unto Yahweh and
to worship him (vv. ^s. 29). All nature shall rejoice, the heavens
and the earth, the sea with all its life and the field with all its life,
224 I CHRONICLES
and the trees of the forest, for Yahweh cometh to judge the earth.
The conclusion of Ps. 96, v. ""^<', is omitted in Chronicles, since
the Ps. does not come to an end with v. ". — 34-36 =Ps. 106' ■"• <«.
The first of these verses is a common liturgical phrase with which
Pss. 106, 107, 118, and 136 begin and makes also an appropriate
closing, Ps. 118", cf. also Je. 2,Z" Ezr. 3" i Mac. 4='. — 35. And
gather us together and deliver us from the nations]. In Ps. "and
gather us from the nations" is a cleai reference to the dispersion
and so inappropriate to the time of David. The writer sought
to remove this significance of the phrase by inserting the words,
and deliver us. — Verse 36, the doxology of the fourth book of Ps.,
is not unsuitable here.
12. iri'c] Ps. 1055 vs. — 13. Sx-iii'' i"i;] Ps. 105^ cnn^.s y-^t. — 15.
n:r] Ps. 105' 1?t (^b^ fj.vrjfxoveio/xei' has grown out of (§*'' ixvT]tiovevwv
= 15?. Ki. BH. prefers the reading of Ps. but the Chronicler may
have changed to pi. imv. intentionally to accord with vv. ^ '■ '''■ '2-
"■ " +. — 16. pri-i^^] Ps. 105' pni:""? which spelling also occurs in Je.
2,^"^^ Am. 79- '6.— 19. BO.-rnj] Ps. io5'2 crvna, likewise i MS., (&, B.
This is the better text. — 20, noScm] lis wanting in Ps. 105". — 21.
c^s*^] Ps. 105'^ a-iN. — 22. 'N'3J3i] Ps. 105's ^N^ij-i. — 23. cv ba.] Ps.
96' ar''. — 24. 1-1133 rs] Ps. 96^ without tn. — 25. Niiji] 1 wanting in
Ps. 96^. — 26. nin-i] <& k. 6 debs ijfxQv = ij^hSni. — 27. ■'2pc3 nnni] Ps.
96* icipcj nsani. nnn is a late word frequent in Aram., elsewhere
in OT. only Ne. 8'°. The word place may have been substituted
for sanctuary because more general and better fitting the abode of
the ark before the Temple was built (Zoe.). — 29. rji:^] instead of
r.-insn^, Ps. 96^, because the Temple was not built. — y^y n-^-i;]. The
meaning is dub. RV. in holy array (margin in the beauty of holiness),
better in holy attire. Perles suggests a connection with the Babylonian
addru "to fear " and interprets veneration before the sanctuary, though
this rendering is excluded in 2 Ch. 20^', which he regards as corrupt
(OLZ. 8, 1905, col. 127). — V. 29c corresponds to Ps. 969^. — 30. This
verse is composed of Ps. 96"" =■»<* "">. — rjflSr] Ps. 96' vji:::. — 31.
Composed of Ps. 96"* and ioa_ — ncN^] Ps. 96'" nrN. — Ps. 96"''--
D'i;:'::3 D'cy |n-' wanting in Ch. — 32. Composed of Ps. 96'"' and 12a.
— r\-[vn }'S;«] Ps. 95'2 ^-p r'?i'\ — 33. ^jsSa n;-^n -t:] Ps. 96'2b i3a K-
iJisS ij?> 's>\ — N3] Ps. + N3 •'3. — 35. ncNi] wanting in Ps. 106". —
Myvi ^nSx] Ps. irn'^x ry\7^\ — u'^^xm] wanting in Ps. — 36. i-:n-i] Ps.
io6<8 i-rxi. — nm'S S'^ni] Ps. ^^-1'^'^.■^. Thus the poetic termination
of Ps. 106 is turned into an historical statement. On '?'?n cf. Ges.
§ "33-
XVI. 37-43.] LEVITES APPOINTED FOR SERVICE 225
37-43. Levites appointed for service. — A continuation of
vv. "-^ — 37. A resume of vv. " '■. — 38. And 'Obed-edom and his*
brethren sixty-eight and Hosa to be gate-keepers]. We must either
read his with (^, H (Bn.) or transpose and Hosa to a position be-
fore and their brethren, etc. (Kau., Ki.). The phrase and Obed-
edom the son of J eduthun'* is probably a marginal gloss which made
its way into the text in the wrong place. The glossator finding
Obed-edom represented as a singer in 15^' 16^ gives him a place in
the family of Jeduthun, the singer (see below on v. «). In 26^ the
gate-keepers of the family of Obed-edom number sixty-two. —
On Hosa cf. 26'°. — 39. Thus according to the Chronicler there
were two sanctuaries, the ark brought to Jerusalem constituting
one and the tabernacle with its other furniture at Gibeon consti-
tuting the other (21^9 2 Ch. i^-^). At this latter Zadok and his
brethren ministered. — On the high place which was at Gibe' on cf.
I K. y ' • — 40. On the continual offerings cf. Ex. 29^8 Nu. 28''- «. —
And to do all that is written, etc.] i.e., everything which was the
priests' duty to do in the sanctuary. — 41. With them] i.e., with
Zadok and his brethren at Gibeon were placed the two guilds of
singers represented by Heman and Jeduthun, while the guild of
Asaph (v. ") ministered before the ark at Jerusalem. — And the
rest of the chosen] refers to all the singers chosen at this time. —
Who were designated by name] i.e., those so designated in i^^
who did not serve in Jerusalem (v. ^). — 42. And in possession of
them were trumpets and cymbals for musicians and other instru-
ments used in sacred song*] lit. and instruments of the song of God.
With song of God, cf. song of Yahweh, Ps. 137^ 2 Ch. 29". — And
the sons of Jeduthtin at the gate] is dubious. Chronicles does not
know of any sons of Jeduthun who were gate-keepers except
"Obed-edom the son of Jeduthun," v. ^\ a late gloss possibly
dependent upon the statement here. Some words may have
fallen from the text between Jeduthun and at the gate. — 43. Taken
from 2 S. 6'"'. 2«a and thus is a continuation of v. ',
37. vnN'?i «idnS] S with direct object, Ges. § 117^. — ora dp nai'^]
cf. Ex. 5" 16* et al. — 38. pn^T'] is merely a copyist's variation of
pnn\ — 39. pnx tn] obj. of 2v;^^ of v. ''. — 42. ancyi] BDB. av 3. b,
•^pniiM j::in] wanting in (S and to be omitted as a dittography
15
226 I CHRONICLES
from V. " (Kau., Bn., Ki.)- Be. holding that 'ni I'a' >'-<2 were equiva-
lent to the nnjaai o-^^j of v. '' rearranged vv. " '• somewhat after the
order of v. ^ reading : ^z ni.T'S rnin'? nic;;'3 npj Ti'X onn^n is-.:m
Dvn;:'D D\-i'?iSi nni-in iinnn ]c^ni D'n'?Nn -i>a' I'rja ncn d'?i3?'^. — 43.
JDm] 2 S. 2Z"'\
XVII. The promise to David in view of his purpose to build
a temple for Yahweh. — Taken with slight variations from 2 S. 7.
According to Dt. 12'° '• unity of worship should become law
after the Israelites had passed over Jordan and when Yahweh
had given them "rest" from all their enemies round about, and
had chosen a place "to cause his name to dwell there" {i.e., when
the Temple should have been built). This "rest" came in
with David and Solomon, cf. 2 S. 7'- " i K. 51^ <4) (We. Hist,
of Isr. pp. 19 /., n.). If the narrative in 2 S. 7 is as late as
the Exile (so Sm. Com.) the writer probably knew of this Deuter-
onomic provision and sought to show why this unit}^ of worship
was not ushered in by David through the erection of the Temple
when "Yahweh had given him rest from all his eneinies round
about" (v. '). To th«_ Chronicler, David, the man of blood, in no
wise fulfilled this condition {cf. 1 Ch. 22' ' ), hence he omitted
from 2 S. 7' the words "Yahweh had given him rest, etc.," and
substituted / will subdue all thine enemies (v. '») for "I will cause
thee to rest from all thine enemies" (2 S. 7")-
1-15. Nathan's message to David. — 1. 2. When David divelt in
his Iiouse] probably the one built with the aid of the King of Tyre,
14' = 2 S. 5". — Nathan, the propJiet] (vv. ^- ^- ^^ and parallels in
2 S. 7, 2 S. 12' +6 times in 2 S. 12, i K. i' f 10 times in i K. i,
2 Ch. 2925 Ps. 51= (title) BS. 47'; in the phrase "acts of Nathan the
prophet" I Ch. 29" 2 Ch. 9"; and frequent as a personal name
elsewhere) was the well-known court prophet during David's reign
and one of the supporters of Solomon at his accession, i K. 1. — ■
Lo, I dwell in a house of cedar and the ark of the covenant of Yahweh
is under curtains]. The contrast between David's regal palace
and the humble resting-place of the ark was sufficient to indicate
his intention to his religious adviser, who immediately responded,
Do all that is in thy heart, for God is with thee. — 3. Nathan's
first impression that God would favour David's undertaking was a
XVn. 1-15.] THE PROMISE TO DAVID 227
mistaken one. — // came to pass the same night, that the word of God
came to Nathan] doubtless in a dream. — 4. Thou shalt not build
me a (lit. the, v. i.) house to dwell in] is expressed in 2 S. in the form
of a question equivalent to a negative. — 5. For I have not dwelt
in a house from the day I brought up Israel, i.e., from Egypt (so
2 S.), unto this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle^].
This statement v^as not literally true, since the sanctuary at Shiloh
seems to have been a fixed structure (see Dr. in DB. IV. p. 500 a,
also EBi. IV. col. 4925, § 2). — 7-14. H. P. Smith finds traces of
rhythmical structure in this oracle, Ijut not without extensive
emendation (see Com. in loco). — 7f. / took thee from the pasture,
from following the sheep] as narrated in i S. 16" ^■. From this
humble origin Yahweh had made David a prince over Israel and
promised to make his fame like that of the great men of the earth.
It is implied that David's honour is great enough without the
added credit of building the Temple. — 9. And I will appoint a
place for my people Israel and will plant them] i.e., the establish-
ment of the people in the promised land in safety from their enemies
was not yet accomplished, hence the time for the building of the
Temple as set forth in Dt. 12'" «• had not yet come {v. s.). — 10.
Will build thee a house] certainly means a dynasty and not a build-
ing.— 11. J^hou must go to be with thy fathers]. 2 S. "thou shalt
sleep with thy fathers" is the more usual phrase (r/. Gn. 473° (J)
Dt. 31 '6 1 K. 2'° 11^3 2 Ch. 262, etc.), while that of Chronicles has no
exact parallel, yet cf. i K. 2^ Gn. 15'=. The motive for the change
in Chronicles is difficult to determine. Boettcher (Aehrenlese)
thought the expression to go was more indeterminate and that it
was introduced by one believing in the continuation of David's
life. — 12. A direct reference to the Temple to be built by Solomon,
with which is coupled the fundamental Messianic promise.
In 2 S. the verse may be a gloss (so Sm.). — 13. The foreboding
of iniquity with its punishment contained in 2 S. 7'^ is omitted
evidently to avoid a sombre thought. "So sensitive is the Chron-
icler for the honour of David and his house that he cannot even
endure in the mouth of Yahweh a reference to its faults" (Ki.).
— As I took it from him that was before thee] i.e., from Saul, who is
mentioned by name in 2 S. {v. i.). — 14. But I will settle him in
228 I CHRONICLES
my house and in my kingdom forever] 2 S. "Thy house and thy
kingdom shall be made sure forever before thee." The change of
Chronicles (2 S. has the more original text) is due to the point of
view of the Chronicler, who regards the kingdom as a theocracy,
cf. "upon the throne of the kingdom of Yahweh" 28*, "thine is the
kingdom, O Yahweh" 29", "upon the throne of Yahweh" 29".
My house must be taken parallel to my kingdom, thus referring to
the people of Israel.
1 . Ch. has Ti'JO, iMT twice, njn and mj?n> nnn mn'> ma |nx where
2 S. 7'- ' have "'3 > I'^sn , nj nxn, r\-p-\^r\ 11-3 yv' D^n'^xn jnx. The
Chronicler by his last phrase has given a clearer description of the
position of the ark. — •'^jn] Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. has elsewhere ^jn, except
Ne. i« {LOT.^^, pp. 155 /., foot-note). — 2. Ch. has again Tin in
the place of iSrrn, and has omitted l*? before nu';*. — 3. D\-i':'Nn] 2 S.
7< ninv — ;.^j] 6 MSS., & + n>3j.-i, which is not original, cf. 2 S. — 4.
•'■^y; Tin Sn] 2 S. 7* in Sn n2>' "tn. — -2;^^ n'^n •>':' njj.n nnx n"?] 2 S.
v-ias'S no iS njan nPNn. The latter is undoubtedly the more orig-
inal statement, non is either definite with the idea, the house which
shall be built, not by thee, but by thy son (Bn.), or Ges. § 126^,
only definite in the writer's mind and to be rendered indefinite in
our idiom. — 5. '?n-\S'"i rx \-i'''?;'n iii-s crn j-:] 2 S. 7^ ^J3 tn \iSj;n dvdS
D'-»x:;2 Sn-\;;". — prcci Shn Sn Snsr: n^n.Ni] 2 S. p';'~2i Snsa iSn.-iD n>nNi.
This latter is probably the true text (Be., Kau., Ki., Bn.). Bu.
(SBOT.) after Klo. reads j:>'s ':'N ]yi'::r:! hna Sn Shnd iSn,-\D n^nxi.
"Thus only," says Bu., "does the necessary sense of shelter under
strange roofs find proper expression whereas iH (in 2 S.) expresses a
wandering about in and with a shelter belonging to it corresponding
to the later fiction of ">>'i2 "^ns in P." But one would expect this
later fiction to be shown by the text of Ch. rather than S. (Bn.). — 6.
After '^;a2 2 S. 7' has >:2. — 'Jsr] the true text. 2 S. ■'•J3U', a clear
case of copyist's confusion of letters. — '•cv] 2 S. + SNTiri ."n. — 7. jd
■'■^nx] 2 S. 7* -ins-: supported by Ps. 78". — Before ''ntj"> 2 S. has
''>, an unnecessary repetition and perhaps not original. — 8. pn;Ni] 2
S- 7' ^~1 — • — 2 S. has "^nj after cr'. (6 in 2 S. agrees with Ch. in
its omission, hence Ch. has the true text (We. TS., Dr., Bu., Sm.).
— 9. As in V. ' the preposition with ''ry is repeated before 'rsntf^ in
2 S. 7'°. — ^~^2'^] 2 S. ^r^^y;^. Bn. thinks the text of Ch. is original,
but the use of n'?^ in Dn. 7=5 suggests that this verb was supplanting
the older and more usual nj;\ Ci tov raireivCxrai reproduces the text
of 2 S. Perhaps 1| comes from a late transcriber. — 10. C'c:^i] 2 S.
7'i 3rn jc'^i. In both texts after ^ in 2 S. 1 should be omitted (Dr.,
Bu., Bn., Ki. ?). To retain the 1 causes a reference in v. "> to the
XVn. 16-27.] DAVID'S PRAYER OF THANKSGIVING 229
Egyptian oppression, but this is a thought alien to the context, in
which rather the blessings secured by the settled government of David
are contrasted with the attacks to which Israel was exposed during
the period of the judges.— IO^in So hn 'nyjsm] 2 S. T'2it< Sod ih inn^jni.
We. TS., Dr., Bu. prefer for the te.xt of 2 S. as more agreeable to
the conte.xt io'n Sdd iS inn^jni. Bn. prefers in Ch. roMN as demanded
by the context. — nini -\h ruji noi iS ijni] 2 S. ncj;' n-ij 'a nini ^'7 luni
niH'' 1^. Both of these texts are harsh. Ki. in Ch. removes 1 before
ni3. ($ read I'^uxi and I will magnify thee. This is followed by
Oe. and commends itself to Bn. In that case we should read nj3N,
cf. the first person in v. "; nini has then arisen from n\ni the first
word of V. ". Bu. (SBOT.) gives as the true text in 2 S. ^'7 nuD 'jjni
nin> iS r^z'-;" no >d. Sm. suggests that the material of v. '" is a gloss
(see his full comment). — 11. n<m] wanting by error in 2 S. 7'* (Dr.,
Bu.). — "i\-iijs ay no'rS] 2 S. iinnx pn n^yzn followed by <& in Ch. —
•\>:2r2 rt^n'' -\;'n] 2 S. yyi^v nx'' t^n, also C6 in Ch. The change in Ch.
has been made to point more definitely to Solomon. — imoSc] 2 S.
inoSnc, see 14^. — 12. >h] 2 S. 7" ''Di:'S. — indo] 2 S. inaScD nd3. (gin
2 S. supports the te.xt of Ch. — 13. On omission see above. — tdn]
supported by 05 in 2 S. 7'^ where l§ has '\^0\ and preferred as more
pointed by Dr., Bu., Sm. — i^jflS rtTi nB'Nc] 2 S. imiDn la's Sin'^:' djjd
I^jd'^c. The shorter '^xt of Ch. is original (Be., We. TS., Dr.,
Bu., Sm.). — 14. nSiy nj> paj mni ikddi oSiyn -\y inisScai >ni3a inimDym]
2 S. 7" dSijj n;;iiDJ nini -|ndo -jijoS oSiy n;; inoSnoi 1013 jdnji.
16-27. David's prayer of thanksgiving. — Thus David ex-
pressed his gratitude for the divine promise delivered by Nathan. —
16. Then David went in], the newly erected sanctuary (Be.) or
possibly his own house, — and sat before Yahweh]. This posture in
prayer is peculiar in the OT., but for instances among related
peoples, see Sm. on 2 S. 7'^. Standing (Gn. 18" i S. i"), kneeling
(i K. 8^^ Ps. 955 Dn. 6" "»') and prostration (Nu. 16" i K. 18^2)
were the usual postures. — The prayer begins with an expression
of wonder that Yahweh should have exalted one so humble and
from such an unimportant family, — Who am I, O Yahweh God,
and what is my house, that thou hast brought me thus far? — 17.
This verse is obscure both here and in the parallel text of 2 S.
{v. i.). — 18. What shall David continue to say unto thee?^ for
thou knowest thy servant]. This rendering is of a te.xt corrected
from 2 S. {v. i.). David's heart is too full for utterance, yet God
will understand his servant. — 19. Again the text is doubtful. — 20.
230 I CHRONICLES
All that men have heard reveals the uniqueness of Yahweh, beside
whom there is no other God. — 21. According to Geiger (Urschrift
und Ucbersetzungen, p. 288) this verse in its most original form
contained a contrast between Israel's God and the gods of other
nations. His reconstructed text {v. i.) is rendered as follows : And
who is like thy people Israel? {Is there) another nation in the
earth which a god went to redeem to himself for a people and to give
to himself a name and to do for them great and terrible things in
driving out from before his people a nation and its gods. But the
Chronicler, or rather his forerunner in 2 S., applied all this to
Israel by the change of another ("inS) to one (THS) and other
changes until Chronicles read: And who is like thy people
Israel ? a unique nation which God went to redeem to himself as a
people, giving to thyself a name by great and terrible things in driv-
ing out nations from before thy people, which thon didst redeem
from Egypt. Chronicles passes from the third to the second
person, not an unusual construction. — 22. It is Israel's glory
that the true God had chosen them in preference to any other
nation, that they should be his people and he should be their God.
— 23. The King prays that the message borne by Nathan, the
prophet, may be established forever. — 24. Saying, Yahweh oj
hosts is the God of Israel * and the house of thy servant David is
established before thee]. The prayer seems to be that the people
may say that Yahweh is Israel's God, and that David's house
has the legitimate right to rulership by divine choosing. The
change from third to second person is awkward, but possible (v. s.
V. ="). Thus King David puts the rights of his house to rule
beside the right of Yahweh to be the God of Israel, and wishes
them as firmly estabhshed. He justifies the boldness of this
petition by recalling the divine revelation which he had received
through Nathan, — 25 thou hast revealed to thy servant that thou
wilt build him a house. — 27. The prayer closes with an assertion
of the confidence of the worshipper that Yahweh has blessed his
house and what he has blessed, shall be blessed forever. In this
the text differs from that of 2 S., where the last verse is a prayer
for this blessing. Bertheau regarded the text of 2 S. as the original
because the request for the fulfilment of a promise and also for
XVn. 16-27.] DAVID'S PRAYER OF THANKSGIVING 231
new blessing has its proper place at the close of the prayer. This
very fact, however, Benzinger alleges as the reason why we should
look for the change of a perfect into an imperative, and not the
converse. The request for fulfilment he finds in v. ". Xhe
leading thought, he says, of David's prayer is that Yahweh through
his revelation has already brought a blessing and made a beginning
with salvation (vv. '' ") ; therefore David's house will endure, for
whatever Yahweh once blesses, remains blessed forever, and this
thought is disturbed by the introduction of the imperative.
16. ijn] 2 S. 7's «:jn, cf. v. '. — s^n'^s mn''] 2 S. nini ijin. — 17. 2 S.
7'3 has ni> after ppn. — :\i"^n] 2 S. nin^ ijin. — ^>-] 2 S. 'rx. — iiro ijn\N-ii
n'^j'cn D^!<^]. (Some Heb. mss. have 11.13 instead of "upd, which helps
not at all in solving the te.xtual difficulty.) And {thou) hast regarded
me according to the estate of a man of liigh degree, AV., RV. 2 S.
DiNH nin nsTi, And this too after tlie manner of men, RV., And is
this the law of man? AVm., R\'m. Both of these texts are clearly
corrupt and are unintelligible. (B in Ch. has Kai i-rreidh fxe cos Spacns
dvdpwirov Kai i/i/'wcrds fxe, the last clause of which, and thou hast exalted me
("'j'?>Mi), gives good sense, and from the first half Bn. would derive ^jn">."1
HNnDJ and render, Die liessest mich schauen etwas ivie eine Vision. Ki.
gives 1^ up as hopelessly corrupt. Oe. reads -jVi'cn dtn rmr'D ij.i\s-ii,
Thou regardest me after the manner of a man {i.e., in thy condescension),
O thou who exaltest me. Ke. gave a similar meaning but retained n'7;'rn
(as corresponding to pinic^) as regards the elevation, i.e., the elevation of
my race (my seed) on high. We. TS., after hints of Be. and Ew. (see
Sm.), reads in 2 S. DIvNH nin ''jsi.n /Ihc? thou hast let me see the generations
of men, i.e., hast given me a glimpse into the future of my descend-
ants. Bu. adopts this and then from n'?j7D in Ch. adds u^y^. Kau.
favours the reading of We. TS. — 18. nx niaoS -p'^x n^T tvj i^Dr na
ina;] 2 S. 7=° T''^n nai':' niy in f]-Dv nsi. Ke. defends the text of Ch.
as the original because the more difficult. Zoe. allows it. Oe. reads
")2D^ after (S rod do^daai and thus obviates the harsh construction
of "i^aj; PN. But iT^y nx is wanting in d and came probably by
copyist oversight from the second half of the verse and 1^22^ is likely
an error for i^i*^, hence the text of 2 S. is to be preferred (Be.,
Kau., Bn., Ki.). — In 2 S. -\-^2-; is followed by nin^ iji.x. Ch. omits
■■j-iN, and nv-i>, in M, goes with v. '». — 19. nirr] see v. is. — i-ia;] 2 S.
7'' T<3i, which Be. and Ba. regard as the original reading but (6 in
2 S. agrees with Ch. and is followed by Bu., SBOT., Sm. rightly
(Bn.). — After ynnS 2 S. has Ti3>' but wants .ii'^njn Vd tn. (g^ in Ch.
omits the clause. Bu. in 2 S. rearranges v. ^^^ (after Reifmann given
232 I CHRONICLES
in Dr.) (see Sm.), rt<;r\ n'^njn ^2 rn •]-^2y' 'p-i^nh p-C'i'. The Chron-
icler, however, had clearly the present order in 2 S. before him. — 20.
Ch. has retained only .-iin> out of o dvh^n nin> nSij jd "^y in 2 S. 7=^
before ^vS". The words n'^'iJ p ^'J may be represented in the So pk
niSnjn of the previous verse (Be ). — 21. Both the texts of Ch. and
2 S. 7" give evidences of corruption, but the former is the better. Ch.
has rightly '^Nnr^ instead of ':'N-»u"r, T^n instead of lo'^n, and t:nj instead
of is-i.s'^, while 2 S. has correctly i'^ avJ'*? instead of 1'^ avz'^, and ."Snj
instead of ,'T?njn. Both texts require emendation of ins into inx
after ^^ in 2 S. Ch. has omitted BoS pvy-;"^) (to be read cnS 'Si) after
sy and also at the end of the verse vn'^s. The passage according
to Geiger {Urschrift, p. 22S) followed by We. TS., Dr., Bu., Sm.
(and Ki. in Ch.), originally read as follows: ■^^N ■>« S^nt" "|:;>o ''21
niNniji n'^nj an"? rv;'>'?i d::^ i'? cv.;''^i c;*^ 1'? nnsS a^nSx I'rn t^tn jf-iNa
vhSni ^u 123; ^JD3 cnj''. Bn. emends 21- S reading nu-ni and thus re-
tains the second person and the clause respecting redemption from
Egj'pt, which clause Ki. regards as an insertion or marginal note. — 22 .
j-.m] 2 S. 7=^ iS ]m~\ — 23. nin^] 2 S. 7=^ a^n'^s mn\— jcn^] 2 S. cpn.
— 24. psn] wanting in 2 S. 7-^ and to be struck out as a dittography
from V. -'. — Sxil;^ tT-n] wanting in 2 S., also to be struck out as a
mere repetition of the following 'rx-^r^'S dvi'^n. — 2 S. has '?Nir^ Vj? and
has nini before poj. — 25. '.-i'?n] 2 S. 7" Ssis" viSs m.xas mnv — mj^'?
r^3 ^'^] 2 S. l"? nj3N nu n::^'^. — After T!3y nsd 2 S. has i^S rx and
after y::^, TNtn nSspn tn. The former is necessary to the text, but
the latter is probably a needless copyist addition (Bn.). — 26. The
text of 2 S. 72s is fuller and as follows : a^^^sn Nin nrs nin> ijin nn>'i
nNrn r^nv^n rs ^^3J; Ss -i:n.-ii n^vS rn'* -|n3-<i. — 27. -\-\2h nSxin] 2 S. 7='*
T\3i Sxin. — □'^i;S Tiasi rDia nin'« n.-s "i^] 2 S. mai nini ^jnx n.nN ^3
uh^^h -]''2'; r'3 T13'' in^i^n. On these changes see above.
XVIII. 1-13. A summary of the foreign wars of David.—
Taken with slight variations from 2 S. 8'-'^. David defeats the
Phihstines and acquires Gath with its dependencies and conquers
Moab, Zobah, Damascus, and Edom. As a con^eqaence of the de-
feat of the King of Zobah, the King of Hamath sends gifts, hence
David controls practically all of Syria south of Hamath except the
Phoenician cities and the remaining cities of Philistia. — 1. Gath and
its duuglitcrs] instead of the unintelligible "bridle of the mother
city" RV. of 2 S. 8'. Whether the reading of Chronicles is the orig-
inal is impossible to determine. We. TS. and Dr. think it derived
from 2 S. — 2. The Chronicler omitted from 2 S. the passage, "and
he measured them with the line, making them to lie down on the
XVm. 1-17.1 FOREIGN WARS OF DAVID 233
ground, and he measured two lines to put to death, and one full
line to keep alive," possibly because this harsh treatment of the
Moabile captives cast reflections upon the character of David
after the previous kindness shown him by the Moabite King, i S.
22'' '•. Of that incident the writer of 2 S. 8^ seems to have had no
knowledge (Sm.), but the Chronicler certainly must have been
acquainted with it. This fact, then, rather than the excessive
cruelty of the measure, probably influenced him, cf. 20=. — And
brought tribute] probably, as in the days of Mesha, this consisted
of wool, 2 K. 3^ — 3. Hadad^ezer*]. Chronicles has here and else-
where Hadarezer, cf. vv. ^- •"• '» ig'^- i^, as also (^ in all the parallel
passages in 2 S. The original form of the name was of course
Hadadezer, as in 2 S. M, and i K. 11". The component Hadad
appears in the name Benhadad, carried by a number of kings of
Damascus of later times, i K. 15"- =0 = 2 Ch. 16- " i K. 20', etc.
Of- these Ben-hadad II. is known in Assyr. ins. as Dadda-id-ri
(var. ^idri) = Aram. Hadad-idri = Heb. Hadadezer (KB. i,
p. 134, n. i). Hadad was the name of a Syrian deity. The name
signifies Hadad is help (Dr.) (see Sm.). — Zobah] an Aramcan
state of consequence during the reigns of Saul (i S. 14^") and
David, mentioned in Assyr. ins. as Subutu or Subiii (see Del.
Par. pp. 279^., Schr. KAT.- pp. 182 Jf.), and situated according to
Noeldeke between Damascus and Hamath (EBi. I. col. 280 § 6).
— Unto Hajfiath] is an addition to the text of 2 S. Whether from
a glossator or, as is more likely, from the Chronicler, the statement
is an inference from vv. ' *•. Hamath is identical with the mod.
Hamd on the Orontes about one hundred and fifteen miles north of
Damascus. — Ashe went to establish his hand by the river Euphrates].
The subject is either Hadadezer (Be., Zoe., Dr.) or more probably
David (Oe., Ba., Sm.). — 4. A thousand chariots and seven thousand
horsemen] but according to 2 S. David took a thousand and seven
hundred horsemen and no mention is made of the chariots. Since
(i of 2 S. agrees with Chronicles, the Chronicler did not likely alter
the text, but rather reproduced what he found. — David hamstrung
all the chariot horses] as a measure to insure peace, cf. Jos. 11 ^ ^
The Hebrews among their hills were slow in adopting cavalry and
chariots, but David now began their use, for he reserved from them
234 I CHRONICLES
[horses] for a Imndred chariols. — 5. Aram of Damasciis]. Aram
is a singular collective for the Arameans. The Aramean kingdom
with Damascus as its chief city played an important role in the
history of Syria until it was finally overthrown by Tiglath-pileser
III in 732 B. c. Damascus itself is a city of extreme antiquity,
although early references to it are few and uncertain. It appears
as Timasku in the list of the Syrian conquests of Thotmes III, and
as Timcdgi, Dima^a, in the Amarna letters. — The independence of
Damascus was also threatened by this attack upon Zobah, hence
the willingness to succour Hadadezer. — 6. Then David put garri-
sons'^ in Aram of Damascus] as was his custom to do to subjected
peoples, cf. V. ". — The writer piously ascribes the credit for David's
victories to Yahweh, cf. v. '^ — 7. Shields of gold] is a somewhat
doubtful rendering, more likely arms or armour (Ba. Exp. Times
X. pp. 43/.). Of gold would refer to the decoration. — 8. Tibhath]
(so read also in 2 S. S^ f) and Cun f ] (2 S. Berothai) are other-
wise unknown. Furrer {ZPV. viii. p. 34) identifies the latter with
the mod. Kuna near Bereitan. — Whereivith Solomon made the
brazen sea and the pillars and the vessels of brass] is an addition
from the hand of the Chronicler, whence it made its way into ($
of 2 S. — 9. To u, king ofHamatli] (2 S. To i) is otherwise unknown.
Hamath, regularly mentioned as the northern boundary of Israel,
on the western side of Hermon immediately north of Dan. This
kingdom had plainly been threatened by the Arameans whom David
defeated. — 10. Hadoram, his son] (2 S. Joram). Nothing further
is known of him. The name appears as that of an Arabian tribe
in 1=' {q. v.). — Upon the defeat of Hadadezer Tou hastened to
send his son to bless David, i. e., to congratulate him, possibly to
acknowledge his suzerainty, and to purchase his favour with gifts.
— 11. These also did king David dedicate to Yahweh] together with
the spoils of war from the nations, Edom, Alo'ab, 'Ammon, the
Philistines, and 'Amalek. 2 S. adds "and from the spoil of Hadad-
ezer, son of Rehob, king of Zobah." We have no other mention
of a war of David with Amalek except that in i S. 30, where we
are told that David distributed the spoil among his friends in
Judah (vv. =6 ff). — 12. And when he returned he smote Edom*
in the Valley of Salt eighteen thousand]. This is probably the
XVm. 1-17.] FOREIGN WARS OF DAVID 235
original text here, an abridgment of 2 S. 8'^, "And David made a
name. And when he returned from his smiting of Aram, he
smote Edom,* etc. " M of Chronicles, Moreover Abshai the son 0/
Zeriiiah, is due to a curious misreading of a copyist {v. i.). The
Edomites may have taken advantage of the absence of David and
the army, when they were far north, to make a hostile raid, as the
Amalekites did when David left Ziklag to go north with the Philis-
tines (i S. 30). The Valley of Salt is only mentioned in connec-
tion with Edom, 2 Ch. 25" 2 K. 14' Ps. 60=. On account of its
proximity to the salt mountain, Khashm Usdum, and to the Salt
Sea, it has been identified with the plain es-Schkhah, at the southern
end of the Dead Sea. — 13. And he put garrisons in Edom] as he
had done in Damascus, v. «. The pious formula which closes v. «
is repeated here verbatim.
1. nri>i] 2 S. 8' + -tn. — n>rjai nj pn] 2 S. n^sn jpd ns, which is
" quite unintelligible (see Sm.). — 2. On omission see above. — 2Nin vhm]
2 S. 8^ ONiD inni. — 3. -irj,mn] many mss., 2 S. 8' ^Ty-n^. Ch. pre-
serves a corrupt spelling, which since it appears in (6 of 2 S., 'ASpaafa/s,
may have been found in this form by the Chronicler. — Ch. has
omitted am p. — n,-i::n] wanting in 2 S. Bn. thinks it is a corruption
of 7\-2^ry, at Helam, see 19". — ^^sn'^] 2 S. ^''^'n^. The former is read
after Dr. by Bu., who thinks it represented in iiriaT^aai of (S in
2 S. — p^d] wanting in Kt. of 2 S., given in Qr. and some MSS. — 4.
cir-iD didSs nyas'i 2di i'^s] 2 S. 8* c^r-iD tind yzz'y iSn. (6 in 2 S.
agrees with Ch. But l| of 2 S. is likely nearer to the true reading,
which may have been originally seven hundred cJiariots, cf. 2 S. 10",
to which was added a thousand horsemen, and finally by other ad-
ditions and changes the text of Ch. appeared (see Bn.). — 5. J<2'i]
2 S. 8^ Nam. — In ityDii instead of ptr'm we have an unusual spelling,
cf. V. ^ and Syriac ^^ojn^hi. For a full discussion see J. Halevy,
Revue Semitique, 1894, pp. 280-283. — ■'■>'T"^^] see v. ^. — 6. c^3i'j gar-
risons given in 2 S. 8« has fallen from the text as the object of
Di'M. It is found in the Vrss. — vti] 2 S. ^n.-n — •^•<^•^^^^] 2 S. in pn. The
former gives the better idea, Yahweh gave victory to David. — 7. Sjj
nj;-] correct over against —33; Sn of 2 S. (Be., Dr., Bu., Sm.). —
dSb'ti"! ax^;3M] wanting in ^. — 8. nn^J"] true reading confirmed by CS
in 2 S., where in ^ naan, cf. Gn. 222*. Kau. reads nagni. — jiaci] 2 S.
T-\2':\ (S in both 2 S. and Ch. has iK tQsv ^kX€ktQj> = m-n.2D cf.
16" or -\<i2r:T2 (Bn.), •'-iinar: (Sm.). Nothing is known of a city of either
name. — 'ui T]-y; na] wanting in 2 S., an addition by the Chronicler,
V. s. — 9. v;r] 2 S. 8' ^>'p, but the text of Ch. is confirmed by (B in
236 I CHRONICLES
a S. and is the more probable form (Dr., Bu.). — naix ^Sd] wanting in
2 S. — 10. n'?s"ii] 2 S. 8"> adds the King's name. — ainn] 2 S. c^iv,
but since ^ in 2 S. has leddovpav the text of Ch. is to be preferred
(Dr., Bu.). — .-;;'nji ']D:>^ ant •''73 '^n] 2 S. '^2^ anr "i'?3i p|D3 1V3 rn noi
ncnj. — 11. N-.:'j] 2 S. 8" tt-npn and also after DMjn the additional
clause ^22 -itt-N. — ans*::] 2 S. S'^ aisa. The text of Ch. is to be
preferred (see Sm.). — 2 S. has after pSsjjci the additional clause
naix ■i'?D am ja iryTin VS^'oi. — 12. onx rt< hdh hmis p i^oni] 2 S. 8"
D1S HN iriDHo i3'.;'3 a-.:' nn uvm. The first clause, ^«^ David made a
name, the Chronicler clearly omitted. Instead of ^2~•2 the original
after (S in 2 S. was lairai (Bu., Ki.). This by a copyist has been
corrupted into p >::*2«, and then some hand has added the missing
name of the mother hmis. non may have been the correct reading in
2 S. (We. TS., Bu.), where as the text now stands we must substi-
tute Dis for DTN, or possibly the original text may have contained
two clauses and as a whole read : sin rs irionn larai Q-y •^^•\ t-;"!
DTK PS nan (Bu., SBOT., somewhat after Be., who read Atid Joab
the son of Zcruiah smote Edam when he returned from the conquest
of Aram). Ke. read as Bu. except T'l instead of n^n. The words of
the title of Ps. 60, n'^3 Nua cnx .--x y^ asv arM, support the reading of
Be., yet the title most probably is subsequent to the text of Ch. with
laz'ai (Bn.). — 13. After a-'asj 2 S. 8'* has the additional clause "^aa
WZ'ii D-' ans, which (if not a dittography) the Chronicler naturally
omitted as superfluous. — V7\^y\ 2 S. "'Hm.
14-17. Administrative officers. — Taken from 2 S. S"-''. — 14.
The King himself acted as chief justice, thus making himself acces-
sible to the people, cf. 2S. 15= ^ . — 15. David's nephew Jo'ab the son
of Zeruiah (David's sister) was over the host]. Cf. 2'^ — Jehosha-
phat the son of Ahilud was the recorder]. This Jehoshaphat
always mentioned in this way (2 S. S'^ 20=^ i K. 4= f) held ofl&ce
also in the reign of Solomon (i K. 4^). The functions of the
recorder ("I'^irTiS, lit. the one who causes to remember) are nowhere
defined exactly. Most likely his duty consisted in reminding the
King of important business (see Bn. Arch. p. 310, Now. Arch. I.
p. 308). — 16. Zadok, the son of Ahitub]. Cf. $^* (68). — Ahimelech*
the son of Abiathar]. V. i., cf. 24'. — Shavsha was scribe]. The
spelling is doubtful {v. i.). The scribe (1S1D) was the King's
secretary, an office distinct from that of the recorder. Shavsha's
two sons acted as scribes in the reign of Solomon (i K. 4'). — 17.
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada ] see 11", was over the Cherethites and
XIX. 1-19.] CAMPAIGNS AGAINST AMMON 237
the Pelethites] the King's guard {cf. 2 S. 15" 20' + v. " Qr. i K.
i38. 4j)_ — ji^ici David's sons were about the king] is the Chronicler's
paraphrase for 2 S. "And David's sons were priests " because he
could not understand how any could be priests except, according
to P, the sons of Aaron (see Intro, p. 13).
14. 2 S. 8'5 has in after ^hm. — 16. nn^as p iScaxi 3V.;>nN p pns']
05, U, 2 S. 8" I'^D'-nx the true reading for Ch., but since Abiathar
is mentioned as priest before, during, and after David's reign, most
modern scholars prefer to read in 2 S. after ^ Abiathar the son of
Ahimelech (Dr.). The change, however, should go further and we
should read in 2 S., but not in Ch., nvj^nx ]:: -["^o^ns p -i.^^3ni pnxi
(see Bu. Com.). — .s-'v.;'] supported against 7\-<^^> of 2 S. by n^j' 2 S.
20^5 and Nr^:;' i K. 4'. — 17. ^r\-^-:in *?;;] 2 S. 8'^ imDm by error. —
•^•cn T''? cjcsin] 2 S. d^'Jid.
XIX-XX. 3. David's war with the Ammonites and their
Aramean allies. — Taken from 2 S. io'-'» 11' 1226- 30. 31 xhe
Chronicler has omitted the narrative of David's kindness to the
house of Saul, 2 S. 9, because he passes over entirely David's
relation to Saul; and he has also omitted the episode of David's
crimes in connection with Bathsheba, 2 S. 11. 12, because it
reflects upon the character of the King. In this story of the Am-
monite war the direct variations from that of 2 S. are of minor
importance, chiefly those of a magnifying character to give David
greater glory, or to simplify the narrative (see especially below
XIX. 1-15. The King of Ammon insults David. — 1. Na-
hash the king of the children of 'Amnion] (v. - 2 S. 10= i S. ii'- '• *
and perhaps also 2 S. 17") was already on the throne during the
time of Saul (i S. 11' ^■), but this does not imply a very long
reign, since we have no exact chronology for the events of either
Saul's or David's reign. — 2. When the Kingof Ammon died, David
resolved to show kindness to his son Haniin because of some
kindness which the father had shown him. What this kindness
was, the history does not tell us. Bertheau suggests it may have
been during the time when David was persecuted by Saul. Hiram's
love for David led to a similar missicjn upon the accession of Solo-
mon (i K. 5" '"). — 3. The princes of Ammon, suspecting another
238 I CHRONICLES
aggressive move on the part of the Hebrew King, warned their
lord in the scornful question, Thinkest thou that David desires to
honor thy father because he hath sent comforters unto thee? — 4.
With a reckless determination to provoke war, Hanun insulted
the ambassadors of David. — The beard was held in high esteem
among the Hebrews. To remove the beards and shorten the
robes of the ambassadors to near the waist, was an insult indeed. —
5. David saved the feelings of his messengers and upheld hi? own
dignity by directing that they should remain at Jericho until their
beards should be grown. — Jericho] (ini^) is the well-known town
in the lower Jordan valley, the mod. Eriha, about fourteen miles
(as the crow flies) from Jerusalem.
1. •.;'n;] wanting in 2 S. 10', which has tun before 1:2. Bu. after
We. TS. omits ]^:r{. — 2. -z] 2 S. lo^ t.;'N3. — Dox"--] wanting in 2
S., which has the additional phrase vay 1^3 and "^n instead of '-y
before V3.s. 2 S. lacks "^n before ""ix, though given in some mss., and
also irnj':' p^n Sn. — 3. 2 S. 10' adds sn^jix after ]ijn, and instead of
TiSn Vf2-; Mi2 y\i<n '-}^'-^^ -[s-i'^i -^pn^ in;a, 2 S. has i";'"i rx i.nn -\n;'3
•l''':'x v-\2-; rx nn n'^-;* nDnn'^i nSj-i'ri. — -i3j::n] precedes the subject to
throw stress upon the idea conveyed by the verbal form, Dr. TH.
§ 135 (4). — 4. an'^jM] 2 S. 10* Djpr •>sn rx n'^jM. — n;--'s-:n]. The Chron-
icler has given a less offensive word than STmrr of 2 S. (Bn.). — 5.
13'?m] and D^i'jxn *?;•] are wanting in 2 S. IO^
6-15. The first campaign. — 6. 7. The Chronicler has quite
rewritten 2 S. 10^'', which reads "The children of Ammon sent
and hired (of) Aram Beth-rehob and Aram Zoba twenty thou-
sand footmen and (of) the King of Maacah a thousand men
and (of) Ishtob twelve thousand men." We. TS. and Bu. omit
"a thousand men," since the Chronicler has a total of 32,000.
The sources or the motives of the changes introduced in the text
by the Chronicler are mostly obscure. That he should convert
footmen into chariots is obvious enough to make the victory of
David so much greater; and possibly a similar motive, and his
love of detail setting forth magnificence, may have led him to
insert as the compensation the enormous sum of a thousand tal-
ents of silver. According to 2 Ch. 25^ Amaziah hires 100,000 men
for a hundred talents. " Ishtob " may have been omitted as obscure
XIX. 1-19.] CAMPAIGNS AGAINST AMMON 239
or because originally joined with Maacah or through oversight.
Aram-naharaim may have been substituted for Beth-rehob be-
cause the Chronicler identified the latter with Rehob of Jos.
i9=«, which as a possession of Asher could not belong to the Ara-
means. Since Arameans from beyond the River took part in the
second campaign (v. '«), Aram-naharaim was an easy substitute.
The assembling of the host at Medeba. is a touch of detail descrip-
tion, but scarcely corresponds to the actual fact, since Medeba is a
city of northern Moab. In some way it may have been confused
with Rabbah of Ammon. — Aram-naharaim] "Aram of the two
rivers," i.e., probably the Tigris and the Euphrates, cf. I'L
— Aram-ma acah] (Dt. 3^ Jos. 13") was a small Aramean kingdom
not far from Damascus in Gaulanitis. — Zobah]. Cf. 18^. —
Medeba] (Nu. 21^° Is. 15= Jos. 13'- '= f; also Moabite Stone
n^intS, line 8) was about six miles south from Heshbon. — 9. The
children of Ammon awaited Joab's attack al the gate of the city,
doubtless Rabbath Ammon, while the Aramean forces were at
some distance in the field. — 10. 11. Joab prepares to attack the
Aramean allies himself with the flower of the army, because they
were probably the stronger, while his brother Abishai with the rest
of the people draw up before the Ammonites. — On Jo^ab and
Abishai^ see 2'«. — 12. If the forces of Joab should show themselves
unable to cope with their Aramean antagonists, Abishai should
send him re-enforcements, and in case Abishai should be put to
the worse, Joab promised to help him. — 14. 15. Joab's help, how-
ever, was not needed, for the Ammonites lost heart when they saw
their Aramean mercenaries in full flight, and retreated within the
walls of their city. — And Jo^ab came to Jerusalem]. For the time
the campaign was closed.
6-7. v;'!<3.-i.-i] 2 S. 10^ irN3j. — nMi D>] 2 S. in^. The remainder of
these verses is quite different in 2 S. {v. s.). — 8. Dnajn n3X Sd] 2 S. lO'
D^-i3jn N^sn Sd. Dr. accepts 2 S., the construction being that of ap-
position. Bu. follows Ch. putting N3i- in construct, but both of these
readings convey the wrong idea that the host consisted of tnighty men.
The original undoubtedly was onajm n::s.i S:) (Th., Graetz, Oe., Bn.),
since the mighty men were David's body-guard. — 9. n-'yn nna] 2 S. 10'
1. ••:•-! n-3. Ch. has the original reading (Be., Bn.). The city is
Rabbah, the royal city of Ammon. — 'ui D^o^nm] 2 S. repeats the
240 I CHRONICLES
names of the four allies. Ch. has given a natural paraphrase. — 10.
iinsi d'jd] 2 S. lo' iinNsi a-'ja::. — iino] 2 S. mna. Bu. follows Ch.
— 11. ^r:iN] 2 S. 10" ■'Z'^2i<, which is the better spelling, so also
V. '^ cf. ii'". — i3-i>'i] 2 S. T^ri. — 12. n;-v;',n'-] 2 S. 10" n;vi"'^. —
■I\-i;'!i'ini] 2 S. ']h i"'>;'inS vidShi. It is impossible to determine which
text is original (Bn.), though probably that of 2 S. — 13. •'-\;] pis,
ark, was probably the original text of 2 S. lo'^ (see Sm.). — 14. liD*^
nsn':':;'? ms] 2 S. 10" a-is3 n-rnS-;''. The wording of Ch. is the more
graphic. — 15. n:;n dj] and rnx] are wanting in 2 S. io'<. ($ reads
a)id they also fled from the presence of Joab and from the presence cf
his brother. Hence it is inferred that 2x11 ^jas stood in the original
text after a->N (Ki.). — 2 S. has after m^^ (2 S. iv) the aaditional
clause it:>' 'J3 '?>r! axp y:.'^^. The unrelieved statement of Ch. and
Joab came to Jerusalem is certainly very abrupt, and more likely an
abridgment of an original than that the text of 2 S. should be an
expansion of an original represented in the text of Ch., as Bn.
suggests.
16-19. The second campaign. — In this the Arameans come
with re-enforcements from the far north in order to regain their
lj5t prestige. — 16. The Arameans had apparently returned to tlie
north, where they rallied and sent messengers and brought out the
Arameans that ivere beyond the River, i.e., the Euphrates. Accord-
ing to 2 S. it was Hadadezer who sent for the northern Arameans.
Either his authority extended to the region of Mesopotamia or
he only applied to the Arameans of that country for assistance. —
Shophach] (v. ^^, Shobach 2 S. io'«- '* f) the commander of
Hadadezer's army, was placed in command of the new troops. —
1 7. David in turn gathered all the fighting men of Israel together,
crossed the Jordan, and came upon them; or better perhaps after
2 S. (fu. i.) and came to Helam, an unkno\\Ti place. — And set the
battle in array against them]. These words are superfluous and
have arisen from a repetition of the te.xt (x'. /.). — Apparently
David commands in person on this expedition. — 18. The Arameans
were again defeated. — Seven thousand chariots] 2 S. 10' ^ "seven
hundred chariots," an intentional change by the Chronicler to
magnify David's victory. But the change of "forty thousand
horsemen" (2 S.) to forty thousand footmen can only be explained
on the ground that the Chronicler preserves the original text.
Otherwise no footmen would be mentioned in 2 S. — 19. This
XX. 1-3.] CONQUEST OF AMMON 241
victory was complete and the Arameans were reduced to the
position of a subject people.
16. laJj] 2 S. io'5 f]}i. — The Chronicler has abridged and simplified
the narrative of 2 S. by omitting the clauses " and they were assembled
together," "and they came to Helam." The latter may be a wrong
insertion in 2 S. (Bn.). He also has retained one plural subject through-
out referring to the Arameans, thus ihey sent messengers and they brought
out, etc., where 2 S. has "Hadadezer sent messengers and brought out,"
etc. — 131-'] 2 S. 131^', so also v. 's. — 17. an'^x Nn^i] to be read with
2 S. ncxSn xaM, Qr. nr':',-! and he came to Helam (Be., Bn., Ki.).
This proper name occurs twice in 2 S. 10, in v. '^, the gathering-place
of the Arameans, and secondly in v. " parallel to its substitution
here. It is possible that in the first instance Helam, read by Cornill in
E-. 47'^ after Sibraim and situated between the border of Damascus
and the border of Hamath, is meant. If this is accepted, Helam was
the northern rallying-point for the Arameans called from beyond the
River (2 S. 10'^) and the reading of iH upon them is correct and 2 S.
-lo" should be corrected from Ch. and not vice versa. — ::nSN Ti>-i
are to be struck out as a dittography from the following and the pre-
ceding words. — ncn'?s cis .'^NipS i^n iv^] 2 S. 10'' in rN^p':' dis idi>"'.
(B"" follows 2 S. and ^ Ch., while in 2 S. (S" follows Ch. and ^ 2 S.
Either there was a variant tradition which made David initiate the
action or more likely this change was due to the Chronicler and
some MSS. of (B came under its influence. — 18. d^'s'^n] 2 S. lo'^ niNC. —
^Sji w'^'n] 2 S. d:n3. The te.xt of Ch. is to be preferred as original.
Dr. and Bu. read tr'ns. — n^sn nosd -\z' -^syy nsi] abridged from 2 S.
DC r!::M r^^r^ ixjx tc i^ic nvSi. — 19. 2 S. lo'^ has QijSDn Sj with ii^;
'n in apposition as the subject of inim. — nax nSi im^yi -en o-;] 2 S.
1N1M Dna;''! '?xt.;'i nx. The Chronicler is more concerned with David
than Israel and has paraphrased accordingly.
XX. 1-3. The conquest of Ammon. — 1. And il came to pass,
at the time of the return of the year, at tlie time when kings go out]
is doubtless what the Chronicler copied from 2 S. 11', but there
the original was "at the time when the messengers went forth,"
i.e., a year after David first sent messengers to Hanun, 19^ = 2 S.
lo^ (see Sm.). — And Jo'ab led forth the strength of the host and
destroyed the land of the children of 'Amman, and he came and
besieged Rabbah] a paraphrase of 2 S. "And David sent Joab,
and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the
children of Ammon, and besieged Rabbah." The Chronicler
16
242 I CHRONICLES
sharpens the narrative by making it more individuah'stic. — It
seems a curious oversight on the part of the Chronicler to have
retained from 2 S. Now David tvas abiding in Jerusalem, the words
introducing the story of Balhsheba and out of place in the Chron-
icler's narrative, since in the following verses David is clearly in
the field with the army. — And Jo'ab smote RabbaJi and destroyed it].
Cf. 2 S. 12" where the text is faulty (see Sm.). According to what
seems to have been the original text of 2 S., Joab captured a
fortification which protected the city's water. With victory thus
assured, he sent for David that the latter might have the glory of
taking the city. By the Chronicler's abridgment, the King appears
abruptly on the scene in time to take part in the sacking of the
city. — Rabbah] (2 S. 11' Am. i'-" Je. 49^ and frequent) the mod.
'Atfiman, thirteen and one-half miles north-east from Heshbon,
twenty-eight and one-half miles east from the Jordan, w^as the
capital of the Ammonites (cf. Baed.^ pp. 142 ff.; Buhl, GAP.
p. 260; and on the history of the place Schiir. Jewish People, II. i.
pp. 119^.).— 2. AndDavidtook thecrown of Mile om"^] the national
god of Ammon (i K. ii=- " 2 K. 231') and probably distinct from
Molech (see Moore, EBi. III. col. 3085). The name has not been
found outside the OT. If this emendation is correct, this state-
ment implies that an image of the deity was found at Rabbah.
A parallel to the idol's crown has been found in that of the Delian
Apollo. — And he found the weight^ a talent of gold and in it was a
precious stone]. The weight is probably an exaggeration, since it
came upon David's head, i.e., it was worn by him. — 3. This verse
has been interpreted to mean that David tortured the captives, and
also that he put them at forced labour. The latter seems the more
likely, hence we render, And he set * the?n at saws and at picks
and at axes.
1. nnSi] wanting in 2 S. 11'. On other variations from the text of
2 S. see above. — 2=2 S. 12'". — im] supplied by the Chronicler. —
Oj??] tliei'' l':i"g, so also 2 S. (^^^ MoXxo(X)/tt /SautX^ws avrdv, and ^
in 2 S. MeXxoX tov ^affiX^us avrCjv (other MSS., MeXxo/x, — cj/i). B
Tulit autem David coronam Melchom de capita ejus. Jewish com-
mentators interpret as a proper name, zi:^o (cf. i K. ii^- " 2 K.
23"), adopted by We., Dr., Sm., Kau., Oe., Bn., and others. — nxiC>i
XX. 4-8.] SLAUGHTER OF PHILISTINE CHAMPIONS 243
hpvr.] better '^p-z—.n Ni-rN (Bn.). 2 S. nSp.?:;. — n^] wanting in 1^ of
2 S., but given in S>, ®, U, and necessary (Dr., Bu., Bn.). — 3. -i:"i] 2
S. 1231 2^11. The text of Ch., a cltt. Xey., was preferred as original by
Be., Ke., Zoe., but that of 2 S. correctly by Ki., Bn. — n -ij.:d] 2 S.
Sr-ian rnrj::, axes of iron. This latter is the true text. 2 S. has the
additional unintelligible clause ]d''"3 Driis n''3"rti.
4-8. Philistine champions slain. — Corresponds with 2 S.
2 1 '8". The Chronicler passes over the story of Tamar and
Absalom, Absalom's rebellion, and the atoning vengeance on the
house of Saul, recorded in 2 S., as foreign to the purpose of his
history. This brought him to the account of the slaying of the
four sons of a Philistine giant, 2 S. 2i'5-22. xhe account of the
destruction of the first the Chronicler omits probably because he
thought it unworthy of David that he should wax faint and require
to be rescued by one of his men, 2 S. 2ii5-'7. He gives then simply
the- story of the death of three sons of the giant, but departs from
the narrative of 2 S. by changing the statement "Elhanan slew
Goliath the Gittite" into "Elhanan slew the brother of Goliath
the Gittite," v. ^. This change by the Chronicler was undoubtedly
made to reconcile this story with that of i S. 17, where Goliath the
Gittite falls by the hand of David. The discrepancy in S. is due
to the different sources of the stories. — 4. Sihhecai the Hushathite
(2 S. 2i'8 I Ch, ii29 and the corrected text of the parallel 2 S. 23"
I Ch. 27" f), i.e., Sibbecai from the town of Hushah ((/. 4^). He
was of the Judean family of Zerah. — Sippai f ] (SapJi 2 S. 2i'8 f)
otherwise unknown. — 5. The place of this war. Gob in 2 S., was
probably omitted because obscure, just as Gezer was substituted
in the preceding verse (1;. i.). — Elhanan, the son of Ja'ir] (2 S.
21"; and another of David's chiefs 2 S. 23^4 = 1 Ch. ii=« f). —
Lalpni f] is a fiction from the lehem of Bethlehem in the text of 2
S. 2i'3 {v. i.)— Goliath the Gittite] (i S. 17^- " 2i'« 22'° 2 S. 2i'« f).
— The staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam]. It is a mark
of the Chronicler's carelessness that he should have retained this
clause descriptive of Goliath when, according to his text, Goliath
merely identifies Lahmi. — 6. 7. The unnamed giant was slain by
Jonathan the son of Shime'a. This nephew of David is ap-
parently called Jonadab in 2 S. 13' °-.
244 I CHRONICLES
4. ncjjn] a corruption of 2 S. 21" ii>' ''H.-'i which (6 has (Be, Zoe.,
Oe., Ki., Bn.). — ifJ3] 2 S. 2^2 in Gob. The Chronicler probably sub-
stituted Gezer for the obscure Gob, which is likely the original form.
It is considered the original here by Zoe. and Ki., while Be. preferred
Gezer in both places. But Gezer was a Canaanite city. Klo. reads
Gath. — ND"in "iti'?'>o idD pn] (many mss. and editions d^ndih) 2 S. rs
7\2'\r) nS>3 na'X f]D. — VJ3'i] wanting in 2 S., and probably an addition
of the Chronicler (Be., Zoe., and Bn. think the word may have fallen
from the text of 2 S.). — 5. 2 S. 21'^ has 2M2 after nrnSc. — nn'M3 pn'^N
riSj ^HN icnS PN (Qr. i^J'O] 2 S. n^Sj pn >cn'^n po nj?' p jjhSn (omit-
ting D'JiN after nj,"', which is a dittography from the following clause).
The Chronicler has changed the original text given in 2 S. to avoid a
discrepancy with i S. 17, where David slays Goliath {v. s.). "i-y^ is
clearly to be preferred to ny^ (Bu.). Ba. favours the assumption
that Goliath is a title and not a proper name and thus harmonises
the two statements concerning the death of Goliath. — 6. mc] 2 S. 21 2°
1^13 a corruption (Dr., Bu.). — >aixi on^'j; vz,'^ U't:' v.";'3iNi] 2 S. p;"2sni
ii:D3 j,'aisi Dins';; ci'i c';:' vVjt pi;'3Xni v-11 probably an amplification
of the original. — n'^u] 2 S. iS^. — 7. n;'C£'] so Qr. in 2 S. 2121, but Kt.
i;Tr and i S. 16' nss'. — 8. nSu Sn] 2 S. 21" nSi nSs p>'3ix pn. The
Chronicler has omitted the numeral because he has omitted the story
of the death of the first of the four brothers. nSi: should be pointed
•n'r^j, Ges. § 6gt, cf. 3*. S.x = n'?K these, v. BDB.
XXI-XXIX. The preparations for the building of the
Temple and the personnel of the servants of the Temple.
— In these chapters David is said to have made such prepara-
tions for the building of the Temple as to make him deserve the
entire credit for its erection. It is to him that the Temple site is
revealed in consequence of the sinful numbering of the people and
the propitiatory sacrifice (2i'-22i). The material necessary for
the building and its furnishings, greatly in excess of what could
possibly have been used, is represented as collected by him, gold,
silver, bronze, iron, timber, hewn stones (222-^- '^), and even precious
stones, with variegated stuff and fine linen (see on 29=), in astonish-
ing abundance. Workmen in wood and in stone, in gold, in
silver, in bronze, and in iron are also supplied without number (see
on 22" '■). Even the plans are prepared in advance and delivered
to Solomon by David with proper public ceremony (28" °).
The princes are commanded to give the young King all possible
assistance in carrying out the great undertaking (22" s), Solomon
XXI. 1-8.] DAVID'S CENSUS 245
himself being admonished to conduct himself piously to secure
prosperity for the work (28' ' ). Thus every problem is anticipated
and solved by David. Solomon becomes merely the representa-
tive who carries out the predetermined plans, and is thus robbed
of the credit for that performance which the earlier historical
writings put down as his greatest glory. The organisation of the
Temple servants, which grew up during the long period between the
completion of the Temple and the post -exilic period of the writer, is
also credited to David in defiance of historical facts.
Modern critics have usually considered the greater part of cc. 21-29
to be from the Chronicler (so Ki., SBOT.). But recently, Biichler
has come to the conclusion that cc. 22. 28/. are a part of an extensive
extra-canonical source which he thinks the Chronicler used here and
elsewhere {Zur Geschichte der Tempelmusik und der Tern pel psalmen,
ZAW. 1899, pp. 130/.). Benzinger carries Buchler's position still
.further, maintaining that c. 21 (ultimately taken from 2 S. 24), except-
ing W.6- 28 s.^ is from the same source, but he ascribes 22'*-" 28"*
14-18. 20 f. 2910-30 to the Chronicler {Kom. pp. 61, 62, 64). Kittel now
adopts Benzinger's position {Kom.). Buchler's whole theory is based
upon radical textual emendation which discredits his results (/. c. pp.
97 ff.). The Chronicler's omission, in the preceding chapters, of
everything which is in any way compromising to the character of
David, properly prepares for this presentation of the crowning acts of
his life. The passage must be late post-exilic, and since we find
many indications of the Chronicler's hand {v. i.), we can see no good
reason why practically the whole section should not have been written
by him. ,
XXI. 1-XXII. 1. David's census and the plague. — This
passage is dependent upon 2 S. 24, but deviates from it in a
number of important particulars, (i) Satan (v. ') instead of Yah-
weh (2 S. 24') is the instigator of the census. (2) The officers of the
army, there associated with Joab (2 S. 24^), are omitted, and also
the description of the country traversed and the time occupied
in taking the census (2 S. 245-8). (3) The results of the census
differ (cp. v. ^ with 2 S. 243). (4) According to Chronicles no
count of Levi and Benjamin was made (v. «), while according to
2 S. all the tribes seem to have been counted. (5) David sees the
destroying angel "between earth and heaven" (v. '«), while in 2 S.
246 vHRONICLES
he is simply described as "by the threshing-floor" (2 S. 24'"). (6)
The elders appear with David, and both are clothed with sack-
cloth and fall prostrate (v. '=). This description is wanting in
Samuel. (7) Chronicles also adds the representation that Oman
on seeing the angel went into hiding with his four sons (v. ^o). (S)
The price paid for the threshing-floor varies (cp. v. " with 2 S.
24="). (g) The fire from heaven is not mentioned in 2 S. (10)
Vv. 26_22i are wanting in 2 S. Although these variations are
extensive and Chronicles has reproduced 2 S. 24 in a freer manner
than in the earlier parallels, there is little ground for the view that
the Chronicler must have used an intermediate source. Of the
main variations, (i), (5), {6), (7), and (9) might be expected from
any late WTiter including the Chronicler; (2) is an abridgment
most natural from him; (3) rather reveals the Chronicler after the
gloss has been omitted (see v. «) ; (4) is in accord with his religious
attitude. Even if an earlier hand were certain, (8) must be an
exaggeration due to the Chronicler, while (10) is recognised as
coming from his hand (except 22', which is certainly an integral
part of the preceding paragraph, v. /.).
Benzinger, followed by Kittel, holds that since these variations cannot
be explained on any one principle, neither by the theology of the Chron-
icler, overlooking exceptions, nor as an abridgment, the Chronicler did
not take the chapter directly from 2 S. However, too much stress should
not be laid on the variations in this case, since the Chronicler would
doubtless have omitted this account as doing David discredit had he
not found a new use for it, i.e., to show how the site for the Temple was
selected, a thing not hinted in 2 S. The changes seem natural enough
from the Chronicler. He abridges what is to David's discredit (2 S.
10''") and expands that which does him credit (2 S. 24'^).
1-8. The census. — 1. Now Satan rose up against Israel and
moved David to number Israel]. According to 2 S. 24' Yahweh
moved David to number the people. Some commentators have
held that Satan has fallen from the text of 2 S. (Ew., Zoe., Oe.,
et al.), but this finds no support in textual criticism. The intro-
duction of Satan, who appears in Jb. i' 2' as an angel bringing
complaints about men before God (cf. also Zc. 3'- "), is due to the
Chronicler, who desired to remove the offence caused by the state-
XXI. 1-8.] DAVID'S CENSUS 247
ment that Yahweh was the direct instigator of an act portrayed
as sinful. David sinned by ordering a census to be taken without
having been commanded to do so by God {cf. Ex. 3o"-'« and the
lustratio populi Romani, introduced by Servius TuUius, which
took place on Mars-field after each census, see Varro, de Re Rustica,
ii, I.; Livius, i. 44, cf. iii. 22; Dionysius, iv. 22). According to
Thenius, Zee., Ba., et al., the arrogance of David revealed in the
census was the principal cause of Yahweh's anger. But such
conduct, though possibly the basis of the popular view taken of a
census, is not hinted in David's prayers (vy.^- "); the census is
regarded by the writer as a sin per se. A connection between an
epidemic and the crowding of people in narrow quarters for
enumeration has been found by some. — For the use of Israel
instead of "Israel and Judah" (2 S. 24') see below, v. ^ — 2. And
David said to Jo'ab, and to the princes of the people, go number
Israel]. The census was a military measure, hence was entrusted
to Joab and only those "that drew sword" (v. =) were numbered.
On Jo'ab, cf. 2'^ — From Be'ersheba even to Dan] i. e., the extreme
southern and northern limits (see Buhl, GAP. pp. 69 /.). Beer-
shcba, the modern Bu-es-Seba' , on north bank of Wady es-Seba'
{cf. 4-8), lay twenty-eight miles (as the crow flies) south-west from
Hebron, and was an ancient sanctuary {cf. Am. 5^). For
biblical derivations of the name, cf. Gn. 21 3' (E), 26'= (J) (see
Buhl, GAP. p. 183, with references there). Dan, the modern
Tell-el-Kddt, had the original name of Laish {^^b) Ju. iS^s,
Leshem {W^h) in Jos. I9<^ It lay in the extreme north of Pales-
tine, and according to Onom. (2nd ed. Lag. 249. 32, 275. 2;^)
was four Roman miles west from Panias (see Buhl, GAP. pp.
238/., with references there; also GAS. HGHL. pp. 473. 480,
who identifies Dan with the modern Banias). For the Chronicler's
habit of defining limits from south to north, cf. 2 Ch. 19^ 30^ Ne.
11'", also I Ch. 135. — 3. AndJo^ab said, Let Yahweh increase his
people as much as one hundred times, is not my lord the king, are
not all of them servants of my lord?*] {v. i.). Popular superstition
connected a plague, and consequently a large decrease of the
population, with the taking of a census. Joab diplomatically
called this fact to his lord's attention by wishing for him Yahweh's
248 I CHRONICLES
blessing in a great increase of people. He also assured the King
of the loyalty of his subjects. — Why will he be a cause of guilt unto
Israel?] i.e., the community guilt which results from the sins of
one or a part of its members, cf. Lv. 4' Ezr. 10' » ". — 5. A^id all
Israel were a thousand thousand and a hundred thousand that dreiv
sword]. This number falls short of those given in 2 S. 24' (800,000
+ 500,000 = 1,300,000) by 200,000. This decrease was probably
intentional on the part of the Chronicler, since he had excepted
Levi and Benjamin (v. «) from the census, an explanation which is
favoured by the round number of the decrease, 100,000 for each
tribe, or 200,000 in all. V. ^i* is a gloss (v. i.). The numbers in
both lists (2 S. and here) are at variance with those in Nu. x. 2. and
26. 6. This verse, wanting in 2 S., is from the Chronicler. Its
historicity was maintained by Be., Ke., Zoe. The Chronicler
excepted Levi because the law required that this tribe should not
be numbered among the children of Israel (Nu. i^^ cf. 2"), i.e.,
for military service. They might be numbered by themselves,
however, for religious purposes (Nu. 3'^ 26"). Some commenta-
tors have held that Benjamin was not numbered because the census
was interrupted (27=^) by a countermand from David (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe.). We., followed by Bn., makes the ground of the
omission of Benjamin the fact that the holy city lay within its
borders. But Jerusalem was sanctified by the Temple and this was
before even the site of the Temple had been consecrated through
the sacrifices of David. The Chronicler would scarcely overlook
this fact when in v. ^o he explains why David sacrificed in Jerusa-
lem. It is more probable that he was influenced by the fact that
the tabernacle of Yahweh, which the Chronicler considered the
centre of worship in David's time, was set up at Gibeon within the
borders of Benjamin (Jos. i8»).— 7. Therefore he (God) smote
Israel] anticipates the account of the plague. According to 2 S.
24' » it is David's heart which smites him for his sin, and leads to
his repentant cry to Yahweh, while here God first shows his dis-
pleasure. It is not necessary to suppose that the Chronicler
wished to represent that David's confession was wrung from him
by the appearance of the pestilence (Ba.). He simply emphasised
the divine leading in establishing the site for the Temple.
XXI. 1-8 ] DAVID'S CENSUS 249
1. iDj."i] rise up, a late usage for earlier dp, cf. 2 Ch. 20" Dn. 8"
10" II'* (BDB. -icy Qal. 6 c; 1. 88). Zoe. following (g i<XTi\, rendered
stood, but ^t' and other variations of <& have 6.vi<jTt\, 15 consurrexit,
& >CLO . — S Ssn^'i Sy NJCJD 1'' Dipx is an attempt to harmonise with 2 S.
24'. — PD>i] the same form in 2 S. 24', but there + 3 against, while
here + inf., cf. 2 Ch. 32" (=2 K. i85''' = Is. 36") where only in
Ch. the inf. follows. Also so used in 2 Ch. iS^, which is certainly from
the Chronicler, cf. 2 Ch. 32'^ i8'' (without doubt from the Chronicler) J.
— 2. -iM-i] 2 S. 242 I'rcn. Same change in vv. '• ^i- 21=2 S. 249- ". so.
The Chronicler seems to prefer nm, cf. 17' = 2 S. 7', 17'= 2 S. 7^ 17'' =
2 S. 7', ii<=2 S. 5^ — ayn i-ia' Vni 3nv Sn] 2 S. 24* ^^^'H ^•'nn na* 3ni> '?.x
iHN. Be. read doubtfully ion ib'n S-'nn na^ Sni aNV Sn. Ki. follows
06 Koi irpbi Toiis dpxovras ttjs dwdtxeus. — naD isS for the unusual t3i-'
and npi3 (in sense of muster) in 2 S. 24^^. taia* appears also in 2 Ch.
1 63 (intensive stem) f. — p ij;i v^^ in3d]. This order elsewhere only
in 2 Ch. 305. 2 S. 242 has yity ivsa nyi pn, so also Ju. 2c' i S. 320
2 S. 3"' 17" 24'- »5 I K. 55 Am. 8". — njj-iNi] cohortative, c/. Ges.
§ 48c for form, § 108J for use. — 3. io>'] 2 S. 24^ oyn. The suffix makes
" Yahweh the real ruler. This is the Chronicler's stand-point, cf. especially
29". — d.id] 2 S. 243 DHoi onri. The repetition is customary in S. {cf. 2 S.
12^). The Chronicler's use corresponds to that in Dt. i". — ':iK nSh
anayS ■'jix'? dSd iScn] is at variance with 2 S. 24' dint "iScn <J^K ^jijji,
which is a more attractive reading. Be. thought the text in Ch. was the
result of reconstructing a corrupt text by conjecture. Oe. preferred the
reading in 2 S., because the increase of one hundred times is not yet a
fact. Although Bn. thinks (&, Kal oi 6<p6a\iJLol Kvpiov imv /3X^7ro;Tes, may
have been corrected from 2 S., he regards it as probable that the text of 2 S.
was also original in Ch. The continuation of <S irdvTes rip Kvplcp fwv
fl-arSes makes it altogether probable that (S is corrected from 2 S., hence
has no independent value. Origen's text (Field) contained only this
last clause. ^'?D^ ->3tn ^Sn may better be taken as a nominal sentence,
with ''JIN as the subject and iSnn as the predicate, which should be
translated "Is not my lord the king" (cf. u^Sd nini Is. 33", nini on
D^•lSN^ I K. i82'; and on the rather unusual use of nS with a nominal
clause Ges. § 152^). A 1 may have fallen out before oSa, but is not
indispensable. nSh must be understood before the second clause as in
Ju. 928 I S. g^"- 21 and probably also in Gn. 20^. This gives a smooth
reading and explains the double question which follows: why does my
lord require this thing, for is he not the king (over these or a hundred
times as many), and why will he be a cause of guilt unto Israel, for are
they not his servants. — rvcvn] cf. Ezr. lo'"- ", also 2 Ch. 24" 28io- "•
u. 13 ^223 Ezr. 96- »• 13, 15; elsewhere Ps. 696 Lv. 4* 5"- '6 22'6 Am. 8";
Torrey says of it "used chiefly by the Chronicler " {CHV. p. 19, on
Ezr. 9«) (1. 7). — 4. Abridged from 2 S. 24*- *. it:B''>i of 2 S. 24^ is replaced
250 I CHRONICLES
by the more common "iSn.-i''i. Both are used parallel in Jb. i' 2', v. s.
V. 2. — 5. iMi] 2 S. 24' ^'?Dn V. s. V. 2 (text. n.). — □■'sj'^n t]hn S.sttt'^ S3 '.im
3in n"^" f^"^ ^^^ riNDi] '?N-i:''' '?o is certainly used for the whole kingdom
in V. *. It will also be noticed that in v. ' the Chronicler used "^nt;" in the
general sense to include the min^ pni ^tt-\y^ -n of 2 S. 24'. The writer's
intention seems to have been to ignore the separation implied in the term
"Israel and Judah." David's kingdom was one kingdom, hence "^ntiI'i S.t
seems to be used in the same sense here. V. ''^^ then is a gloss and
the internal evidence given for this is supported by its absence from (S.
(The phrase could have been lost from the text of (B (or its underlying
Heb.) by homoeoteleuton, but the other evidence is strong against its origi-
nality.) The Chronicler certainly would not reduce the number of 2 S.
24' from 500,000 to 470,000 (Bn.). The glossator was influenced by 2 S.
24^ — 6. 2V^i $]. — 7. 'n hy] cf. same construction in Gn. 2i'2 and more
usually without h-; 2 S. 11" Gn. 38'". — 8. D^nSxn] 2 S. 24'° nin\ A
frequent though not consistent change of the Chronicler, cf. v. •'= 2 S.
24", also I Ch. ri'" 14"' 'i- >*■ " 172. 3= respectively 2 S. 23" 5>9- 20. 2s. 24
7'- ••. See also for further instances Dr. LOT.^^, p. 21 n.
9-13. Gad's commission. — 9. And Yahweh spake unto Gad
David^s seer]. Gad is mentioned twice elsewhere in Ch., 29''
2 Ch. 29"; cf. also 256 where Heman is said to be the King's seer.
Gad figures as a prophetic counsellor of David whilst a fugitive
from Saul, i S. 22^ -j-. — 12. For triads of divine judgments cf.
Lv. 26" '■ I K. 8" 2 Ch. 20^ Je. i4>2 b. 217-9 241" 279- 13 29" '■
^224-36 ^417 ^82 42>'- " 44" Ez. 512 6" '■; also y'^ i2'6; for the angel
of Yahweh as an expression for pestilence, 2 K. 19". The
Chronicler brings out the contrast between "the sword of man"
and "the sword of Yahweh" which serves to make David's
answer (v. ") clearer than in 2 S. 24'^
10. n-jj] 2 S. 24'2 Sju. (S ftpw in both places. We., Bu., et al.,
adopt the reading of Ch. in both places. — 11. S:3p] not in 2 S.; an
Aram, loan-word, late(BDB.), cf. 12" 2 Ch. 29>»- « Ezr. 830 (j. 103).—
12. cja* tt'i'^;;'] 2 S. 24" D^r-y V22' but (6 rpla erri. The reading of
Ch. is original (Be., Zoe., et al.). — hddj] an error for n^p:; 2 S. 24"
Tipj, (S (fterjyeiv ff€,lStefugere (Be., Oe., Ki., Bn.). — dni njtrn'? Tia^iN aim]
2 S. 24" T^vn DN1 •\Q-\-\ Nini. Zoe. prefers the reading of Ch., and Oe. the
text of 2 S. We. (on 2 S. 24''), followed by Ki. and accepted
in BDB, holds that pju'dS arose from a misreading of ptti dni, which
was original in Ch. This is an attractive possibility owing to the
general resemblance of the letters, but the Chronicler introduces the first
two alternatives with V-qn, hence we should naturally expect the text as
XXI. 9-17.] THE DIVINE JUDGMENT 251
given. Moreover, the second clause in 2 S., "idti Nin, shows that some-
thing more than the flight (iD)) of David was necessary to make this
punishment equivalent to the others. T'^mn anni adds nothing not
already expressed in ins. It is far simpler to suppose a l to have fallen
out after '', as the sense demands, so (&^, SI, hence the clause read origi-
nally nja'D 1*? n^a^s aim and the sword 0/ thine enemies overtaking thee.
Cp. for an exact parallel Je. 42'^ The same use of the participle occurs
in the last clause of the third alternative (n-'ni'D). — 13. n'?DN] 2 S. 24'*
n'?i3j, but there ® i/xirecrov/xai.
14-17. God's judgment and David's repentance. — 14. Ajtd
there fell {hz'''\) from Israel] because they became the victims of
the sword of Yahweh; 2 S. 24'5 "And there died (n!2''1) from the
people" in consequence of the pestilence. The Chronicler em-
phasises the divine side {v. s. v. '). — 15. And he (God) repented
him of the evil]. For repentance of God cf. Gn. 6^ Ex. 32'^ i S.
15" Je. 18'" 42'° Jon. 3'". — And the angel of Yahweh was standing
by the threshing-floor of Oman the Jehusite]. The threshing-floor
of Oman lay on the top of Mt. Zion, where later the Temple
was built {cf. 22'). 2 S. does not connect the incident with the site
of the Temple. On Jehusite, cf. i< ii''. Oman is the only Jebusite
mentioned by name. — Verse 16, not found in the parallel text of
2 S., is an embellishment by the Chronicler based upon the phrase
"when he saw the angel that smote the people" (2 S. 24'') (Be.).
In the older narratives the angels of Yahweh have a human form
{cf. Gn. 18 Ju. 6" « 132 ff ), but here the angel hovers between
earth and heaven.
15. inSd QinSxH n-'U"i] 2 S. 24'^ inSch iti nVtfM. The difficulty
with the text of Ch. lies in the indefinite In'^o, since the angel has
already been mentioned (v. '-) and has accomplished his work outside of
Jerusalem (v. '<). Moreover, God gives this command only to counter-
mand it at once. Be., followed later by Oe. and Bn., pointed out that the
reading in Ch. arose in the following manner : 'n it' (2 S. 24'^), in a text
which did not separate words, was mistakenly read nin> and this the
Chronicler changed to 3^^^^'^, according to his custom {v. s. v. '). How-
ever, the text of Ch. should not be changed, for it is the original of the
Chronicler. — pins'no] other MSB. and editions '2, ^ a>s, S* pO^ but ® '2. —
mn-' nxT n>ntt'n3i] a clause not found in 2 S. but necessary here to explain
why God sent an angel against Jerusalem and immediately repented
(Be., Bn.). — 31] enough, cf. i K. 19' Gn. 45=8. — tj-ix] 2 S. 24""' Kt.
252 I CHRONICLES
nnw-i, Qr. r>i^pH;^. 2 S. 24" Kt. n>ps or n;ns^ Qr. as above.
Elsewhere in 2 S. 24 always as Qr. (& 'Opvh in all cases both 2 S.
and Ch. & always ^il.— 16. a>cit'n j>3i yiNn pa] so also (S, «I;
other Heb. MSS. I'inh pai D^r::>n }^3, so U, &.— 17. nsjcS nS ^c;3^]
Be. and more recently Ki. regard these words, which are not found in
2 S., as a gloss, but such an accumulation of clauses is characteristic of
the Chronicler.
18-27. The purchase of Oman's floor and the expiatory
sacrifice.— 18. And the angel of Yahweh commanded Gad]. The
appearance of the angel of Yahweh consecrated this spot, cf. Gn.
2?>^^ Ju. 62" f- i3>'=- " «■. In 2 S. Yahweh gives the command, but in the
narratives in Judges the angel commanded sacrifices to be made.
These may have influenced the representation of the Chronicler.
— 20. And Oman turned about and saw the angel; and his four
sons -with him hid themselves] since to see the angel of Yahweh was
the same as seeing Yahweh himself, which portended death (cf
Ju. 622 13" Tob. 12"' '• also Gn. 32" Ex. 20" ^3'" Is. 6^).— Now
Oman was threshing wheat] is wanting in 2 S. 24, but might easily
be inferred from v. 2» {cf. the similar addition in (g of 2 S. 24'5
KoX ^fiepai 0€pL(T/xov TTvpwv) and appears to have been intro-
duced by the Chronicler in view of the following statement of
v. 2' and Oman went out from the threshing-floor. V. '"^ ends
abruptly with Oman and his sons in hiding, but in a similar
fashion in v. '« David and the elders are left fallen upon their
faces because of the presence of the angel.— 21. And as David
came unto Oman] is wanting in 2 S. but is made necessary by the
insertion of v. ".—22. The Chronicler fittingly makes the King
speak first—Place] more than the actual area of the threshing-
floor (Ba.), which would have been sufficient for an altar (2 S.
24^' a.) but not for the site of the Temple. This change goes
with the increase in the purchase price (v.").— 23. And wheat
for the meal offering] is not found in 2 S. In later times the
meal-offering {cf. Lv. 2''^) was united with the burnt-offering
{cf. Nu. 155 s.)_ The sacrifice recorded in Ju. 1319 may have
influenced the Chronicler. — 25. And David gave Oman for the
place six hundred shekels of gold by weight]. According to 2 S.
242* David paid ffty shekels of silver for the threshing-floor and
XXI. 18-XXn. 1.] THE PURCHASE AND SACRIFICE 253
the oxen. It is not likely that we have here two variant tradi-
tions, nor that one is a corruption of the other. If fifty shekels of
silver is too small a price, by comparison with Gn. 23"*, six hundred
shekels of gold is certainly too high. We have here a characteristic
exaggeration of the Chronicler (Th.) not only for the sake of exalt-
ing David (We.) but also to emphasise the value of the Temple
site {v. s. V. ")j which should not be paid for in silver but in gold.
(Note the later descriptions of Solomon's Temple, in which nearly
everything is described as covered with gold.) While no im-
portance can be attached to the ancient harmonising effort whereby
each of the twelve tribes was made to pay fifty shekels, and thereby
the six hundred in Chronicles was accounted for (Raschi), this sug-
gests what may have been the Chronicler's reasoning in reaching
six hundred shekels as the price of the Temple site. The Chron-
icler makes David pay fifty shekels of gold for each tribe since the
Temple should be the place of worship for all. — 26. And he called
upon Yahweh and he answered him with fire from heaven upon
the altar of burnt-offering]. God shov/ed his acceptance of David's
sacrifices with fire from heaven as at the consecration of Aaron
(Lv. 9=^, cf also I K. i8=<- ^a 2 Ch. y 2 Mac. 2'° «•). This altar is
thus put on a par with the former one (Ki.).
19. -ima] better ^3^^ 2 S. 24'', Be., Oe., Gin. — ^'\r]-' DwO iJi tj-n]
2 S. 24" nini nix n^'to. This change was necessitated by the altera-
tion in V. 18. Gad spoke " in the name of Yahweh " but not at his
direct command (v. s. v. '8). — 20. Be. corrected this verse from 2 S.
24^°. Ke. correctly asserted that v. ^° is not parallel to 2 S. 24^", but
the latter is reproduced in v. 21. The result of Be.'s correction is a
doublet in vv. ^o and 21. — ix'^iDn is rendered by (§^ Tbv jSatrtX^a (=
^'?D^), and D''X3n."io being incomprehensible after "i'^:;n is transliter-
ated nedaxo-^iiv, but translated by ^ (which has rov ^affiXea like ^)
Kpv^ofj.€voi. (^^ also has rbv /3acriX^a, but Tropevo/j.^vovs for □•'N^nnn.
H, 01, follow M. Ki. regards ^'?D^ as the original reading, and the
mistake by which it was read ixSnn led to the insertion of □''Njnn::',
which he supposes to have been originally O^DSnna (SBOT.), thus
finding three steps (Kom.) in the development of the verse, (i) As
Oman turned about, he saw the king going about, etc. (2) As Oman
turned about he saw the angel going about, etc. (3) As Oman
turned about and he saw the angel, his four sons hid themselves with
him, etc. Furthermore, he regards the verse as a gloss in its original
254 I CHRONICLES
form, since it conflicts with v. 'i. The theory falls from its own
weight. No reason is apparent why a glossator should insert this
verse in Ki.'s original form, since it adds nothing and explains nothing.
<B has the supposed original form 1^"^, and also the reading Z'sanrc,
which is regarded as the result of misreading ^N'?D^ for -|^:.n. (See Tor.
Ezra Studies, p. 112.) The Chronicler desired to add more witnesses
to the presence of the angel at this spot, since this fact consecrate 1
the Temple site, and for this purpose the narrative is recorded. The
introduction of the four sons of Oman is thus accounted for. Other-
wise the angel plays a much more important part in this narrative
than in the account in 2 S. {cf. w. ^-- 's- '«• -'= respectively 2 S. 24"- "•
IS. 25)_ — 22. ■<h injn n'^d ID;:] cf. Gn. 23'. — 23. c'J-n-n] threshing
sledges. For a description of them, see Bn. Arch. pp. 209/., Now.
Arch. i. pp. 27,2 f., DB. I. p. 50. — 24. .-~i'?j;ni] Bn. and Ki. correct to
niSynS on basis of (&, but ri'^>n may be an inf. abs. in ni as other ~'^
verbs, cf. 2 Ch. 7' nnini, — 27. pj f] is a Persian loan-word (see
BDB.).
28-XXII. 1. The site for the Temple determined.—/!/
that time, when David saw that Yahweh had answered him in
the threshing-floor of Oman the Jehusite when he sacrificed there
. . . then David said, This is the house of Yahweh God and this
is the altar of burnt-offering for Israel.] Y.-^ has usually been
understood at that time when David saw, etc., then he was wont to
sacrifice there (Luther, Be., Ke., Oe.). Ba. rightly points out that
V. ^« is a protasis to which 22' forms the apodosis, yx.-^- =" being
parenthetical. The translation he was wont to sacrifice there is
doubtful, since the fear of the angel of Yahweh (v. ") did not
prevent David from going to Gibeon to sacrifice after this event.
Before the Temple was built Solomon sacrificed at Gibeon (2 Ch.
v). — It follows that V. =8 and 22', as protasis and apodosis, cannot
come from different sources (as Bn. and Ki. maintain). The unity
of this section is also shown by the fact that this is the house of
Yahweh God (cf Gn. 28") and this is the altar of burnt-offering
for Israel (22') are brought out in contrast to the tabernacle of
Yahweh which Moses made in the wildertiess and the altar of burnt-
offering respectively, which were at that time in the high place at
Gibeon (v. 29). The purpose of these verses is to show how, as a
consequence of the census and plague, the threshing-place of
Oman became the consecrated site for the Temple.
XXn. 2-5.] PREPARATION FOR THE TEMPLE 255
29, p;'3J3] other mss. '3 iti'X, so 51. — 30. nya: J] elsewhere in Niph.
Dn. 8" Est. 7«; in Pi. Jb. 3^+7 times, i S. i6'« '^ Is. 21* Ps. iS^
= 28. 22^. — XXII. 1. D^n'^NH mn^] f/. 29'. The Chronicler seems
to be fond of this designation for the Deity, i Ch. 17"- " has nin^'
D'.-:Sn for mn> ij-in in 2 S. 7'8- '»; cf. also '>sn '^ 22'', 'n '^ 28=" 2 Ch.
j9 6"- "■ « 26" (all probably from the Chronicler); also 32'^ (which
Bn. and Ki. ascribe to a Midrashic source). Possibly a^n'^Nn was
inserted by a late editor (see BDB. mni II. i. h), but then it is strange
that this editor should have chosen almost exclusively those passages
which seem on other grounds to belong to the Chronicler. Of course
the possibility remains that the Chronicler himself inserted D\n'?Nn in
an older source, though this is not likely.
XXII. 2-19. David's preparation for the Temple.— This
chapter is a free composition by the Chronicler, full of general
and exaggerated statements, with a number of short quotations
from earlier canonical books woven together. No careful, definite
statement suggests a trustworthy historian or even the use of an
earlier source. That David contemplated building a temple is
likely (2 S. 7), and he may have made some preparation for it,
but the Chronicler's description must have been drawn by infer-
ence from the older canonical books, assisted by a vivid imagi-
nation.
2-5. General preparation. — Not a studied account of material
prepared for the Temple, but rather a careless list of such things
as happened to occur to the writer. Cedar (T"l^s) is the only
timber mentioned, though fir (tt'll^) (i K. 52^ <">) 6''- ^') and
olive-wood (]12'^ "i^'j;) (i K. 6"- »■ ^^- ^') were also used. — 2. David
is here represented as anticipating the action of Solomon in set-
ting non-Israelites at forced labour, for he commanded to gather
together the sojourners that were in the land of Israel; and he set
masons, etc. The historical fact seems to have been that Solomon
made a levy upon pure Israelites to carry out his building opera-
tions (cf. I K. 5" '• (13 f.) I j28 124). A later writer taking exception
to the reduction of Israelites to practical slavery made the levy
consist of non-Israelites (i K. 9=' ' ). The Chronicler following
this later view represents the levy as consisting of sojourners, but
makes David responsible for calling them together just as he
anticipates every other need in connection with the building of the
256 I CHRONICLES
Temple. With characteristic inconsistency the Chronicler later
represents Solomon as making the levy (2 Ch. 2' '2>- '« '• *" '•)),
The sojourners (gcrtm) were foreigners who for one reason or
another left their native clans and attached themselves to the
Hebrews. Like the jar among the Arabs, the ger was personally
free, but without political rights. By the performance of certain
duties he rendered a return for his protection. His lot was often
hard, as is evidenced by the repeated exhortations to deal justly
with him Dt. i'« 24" 27", to show him kindness Dt. iC 26'% to
refrain from oppressing him Ex. 222" 23 ^ (both JE) Lv. 19" (H)
Dt. 24'^ Je. 7^ Zc. 7'". He was entitled to the Sabbath rest Ex.
2010 2312 (both JE) Dt. 5'^ In P the ger represents the prose-
lyte of the post-exilic community, cf. Ex. 12^' Lv. 24^2 Nu. 9'*
1^16. 16. 29_ — 3^ jf0fi i^i abundance] exclusive of the 100,000 talents
given by the princes (29'). — Binders] obscure. Here they are
represented as made of iron, but in the only other place where the
word is found (2 Ch. 341') they are of wood. Possibly they were
merely iron or wooden pins used to make the joints fast (BDB.
"clamps or the like "). — The bronze was for use in making the two
pillars which stood in front of the Temple, the sea with its support-
ing oxen, and various sacred utensils. — 4. Cedar-trces]oi Lebanon,
the much-prized building-material of the Assyrian and Babylonian
kings as well as among the Syrians, were then abundant on the
Lebanon range east of the Phoenician coast and probably also on
Hermon and the Antilebanons, also on the Amanus Mountains
further to the north, and elsewhere. — Sidonians and Tyrians] the
inhabitants of the two well-kno\\Ti Phoenician cities, on which cf.
I". — 5. For David said to himself] is better than and David said,
etc., since v. ^» states the reason for David's preparation as narrated
in w. 2-4. — Solomon my son is young and tender, etc.] (cf 29')
agrees with the Chronicler's representation that the father and
not the son was the moving spirit of the great undertaking.
2. Dua"^]. The use in the Qal is late (BDB.), cf. Est. 41^ Ps. ^^^
Ec. 2^- ^ 35. The only place where this root is found in any form else-
where in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. is Ne. 12", which is agreed to be from the
Chronicler. There also it appears as the inf. cstr. with '^ (1. 55). —
Dnjn] (S Trdvras toi)s TrpoarjXvTovs, so HI; S" lio^^ /-^^.i V>,V. gm.
XXn. 6-19.] CHARGE TO SOLOMON AND PRINCES 257
takes offence at the word in this connection and corrects to antjn or
CTij.-i, "masons" or " stone-cutters," comparing 2 K. 12" 22' {JBL.
vol. XXIV, 1895, p. 29), but the Chronicler's motive for introducing
onjn is evident, cf. 2 Ch. 2'«. — icyi] 1. 89. — dtiSkh no] 1. 15. — 3.
aiS] also in 22^- ^- ^ 29^ etc., 1. 105. — nnjjn::'^] appears also in 2 Ch.
34" ti where the construction is the same, a verse agreed to be the
work of the Chronicler, 1. 34. — pjn] 1. 54. — 4. . . . px'^] cj. Tor.
CHV. p. 20; 1. 132. — 3-iS] 1. 105. — 5. isnm] EVs. said. Ki. renders
dachte, cf. Gn. 20" 26' Nu. 24" i S. 2o2« 2 S. 5« 1222 2 K. 5" (BDB.
"iCN Qal 2). EVs. render these passages thought. laS Sn {cf. Gn.
8^') may be «\nderstood as well as 12*^2, hence, For David said to
himself. — 'mjn':'] on '7 see 1. 129. — nSycS] 1, 87. — pisin] 1. 6. — nrjN]
cohortative used to express self-encouragement, see Ges. § 1086 (a).
On Chronicler's use of word cf. v. ^, also for pM (1. 54). — 3iS] 1.
105. — This verse is cited by Driver (LOT.^^, p. 539) as one of the
Chronicler's strangely worded sentences.
6-13. David's charge to Solomon. — 7. As for me, it was
my purpose to build a house unto the name of Yahweh my God]
is dependent upon i K. 8'^, which is followed almost verbatim
except in the change of person. The Chronicler represents
David as telling Solomon his son what the latter says of David
in his prayer of dedication (i K. 8'^ «■). — 8. The word of Yah-
weh came to David through the prophet Nathan, commanding
him not to build a Temple (2 S. 7 = i Ch. 17), but no rea-
son is given. Elsewhere David's wars are given as the reason
why he could not build the house of Yahweh (i K. 5'^ ">), but
only because they did not leave him time for other undertakings
(Ki.). The Chronicler was the first to state that David could
not build the Temple because he had shed much blood (cf. 28^),
which may be nothing more than a religious interpretation of
I K. 5" '". — 9. And I will give him rest from all his enemies round
about]. Cf. I K. 5't'- " (4'^'= 5''). — For his name shall be Solomon]
(21^1^ peace, n'ch*^ peaceful), but he is also called Jedidiah
(nnn"' beloved of Yah, 2 S. 12^^ '•). — 10. With only slight varia-
tions, this verse is a repetition of 2 S. 7'5- '^* = i Ch. i7'2- na^ but
the order of the last three clauses is reversed. With the first
clause cf. also i K. s'"-^ ^^^^K — 13. Be strong {cf. i K. 2') and of
good courage; fear not neither be dismayed]. Cf. 28" 2 Ch. 32'
Jos. 10", also Jos. I' (where T*"iyri takes the place of S"l\1).
17
258 1 CHRONICLES
7. >J3] Qr. »J3; other MSS. 1J3 Kt. and Qr., also ^J3 Kt. and Qr.
<g TiKvov, B Fill mi. AV., Ke., Zoe., Oe. follow Qr., but the emphatic
'j« (c/. 28=) favours the Kt. (RV., Be., Ki.). — z:h b;] cf. 28' i K.
817. u. 18 (=2 Ch. 6'- »• 8) I K. io2 (=2 Ch. 9') 2 Ch. i" 24^ 29"'.—
8. 3-1S] 1. 105. — 3'2i] c/'. 283 I K. 2=' Ps. 79'; also Ges. § i24«.
— 9. nc*^-'] CS SaXw/nwi', rarely SaXo/xwi', <S^ and NT. mostly SoXo/twi'.
— ap--? t]- — 10. ■'nij''3n] 1. 54. — '?nt;''' 'j;'] not found in 2 S. 7'^ = i
Ch. 17'=. — ipi3^c] 1. 67. — 11. irj7 nini in^]. Same expression is used
by the Chronicler in v. '", cf. also v. " and 28^°, both agreed to be from
the Chronicler. — 12. nrai Sjr] cf. 2 Ch. 2" (which Bn. and Ki.
ascribe to the same source as this passage). Va:;' is used alone by
the Chronicler in 26'^ 2 Ch. 30", also Ezr. 8'^ Ne. 8', see Tor. CHV.
p. 24.
14-16. Transfer of material. — 14. Noiv behold by my hard
labor I have prepared for the house of Yahweh a hundred thousand
talents of gold and a thousand thousand talents of silver\ The
amounts are impossible, and out of all proportion to the actual cost
of the Temple. The intrinsic value of this gold and silver is very
nearly equal to five billion dollars in our money and its purchasing
value was still more. Even if the light talent was intended (Ke.,
Zoe., et al.), reducing the value one-half, the amount remains
incredible. According to i K. io'<, Solomon's yearly income
amounted to only 666 talents of gold, cf. also i K. 9"- -« 10'°. —
15. 16. Moreover, there are with thee in abundance workmen,
hewers and workers of stone atid timber; and all who are skilful
in every work of gold, of silver, and of bronze, and of iron, without
number]. These two verses were certainly intended to be read
together and their separation causes trouble (v. i.). Without
number refers to the skilful workers of gold, etc. The metals
were weighed, not n.umbered. This construction preserves the
balance for the whole section (vv. ■<-'«). In v. '< the Chronicler
records the material, which David prepared, in two groups: (i)
the metals, (2) the timber and stone. In w. " '• he tells of two
groups of workmen whom David gathered together: (i) those who
did the rougher work in stone and timber, (2) the skilful artisans
who worked in metals. The order of these two groups is reversed
the second time in accord with the Chronicler's habit. (Notice
also timber and stone v. '<, and stone and timber v. '=.) The ma-
XXn. 6-19.] CHARGE TO SOLOMON AND PRINCES 259
terials were without weight . . . in abundance (v. '*), and the
workmen were in abundance . . . without number (vv. '^ ' ).
14. "Ji'^J (5 /caret ttjv Trrwxe^aj' /xov, B in paupertate mea, AV. in
my trouble, AVm. in my poverty, so BDB., RV. in my affliction. Bn.
renders my hard-pressed situation {bedrdngten lage), explaining that
David was poor compared with the rich Solomon. But the whole
account is an effort to exalt David even above Solomon, who has little
to do except carry out the plans of his father. HWB.^^ gives Miihe
for this passage, which is followed by Ki. In Ps. 107" poverty is re-
garded as an affliction (':;), but, possibly in Gn. 3132 and certainly in
Dt. 26', •>:;' means oppressive toil. Be., followed by Ke., rendered
durck meine miihevolle Arbeit. The parall.l ^n^ Sdj in 29^ favours
by my hard (or painful) labor. In any case the 3 is instrumental (so
in the translations of Be., Ke., Ki.), cf. Ps. iS'o Is. lo^* Mi. 4''' Ho. i2'i
and see Ges. § iigo. — 15, a::n] skilful, used of artisans of tabernacle
and Temple, cf. Ex. 28' 316 3S>» 36'- 2- «• « 2 Ch. 2^- i'- ". i3._i6.
-\:D3 t'S Si-ijSi r;:'njS) fiD^S jnt"^] RV. of the gold, the silver, and the
brass, and the iron, there is no number, so Ke., Zoe., et al. Ki. Kom.
translates Gold, Silber, Erz und Eisen ist unermesslich viel vorhanden.
These renderings are dependent upon the Massoretic punctuation, which
creates two difficulties, (i) We should expect the Chronicler to use
Spra px as in vv. ^- ", instead of -i::D3 j-n, when speaking of metals
v/hich were reckoned by weight and not by number. (2) No good rea-
son can be assigned for the repetition of this list which has been given
with more detail in v. '^ It does not appear from the text that the
metals are the main thing and must be grouped together again to add
force to the exhortation, as Ke. suggested. Without emending the
consonant text, both difficulties are removed by connecting eid:""! anr*?
hx-\2^y njfnjSi with the preceding verse, "1SD3 px referring to the s^n Vdi
'2 of V. 15. So (S seems to have understood >5b ^al iras (TO(t>h% iv iravrl
(pycfi, '5 iv xpv'^^V, ^^ ttPTi'P'V) ^'' X'^^'^'y "■"^ ^^ "■'^''^PV, "^"^ ianv
dpidfjjbs. (It is not necessary to suppose that (S did not read the arti-
cle; see Ges. § 126m..) ^ brings out this meaning clearly by repeat-
ing s4,.r:i:^ " workers " before each metal and by translating iddd pN,
I"* -'"'-^ ^001^ £w»] j3? , they (masc.) were not to be numbered.
17-19. David's charge to the princes. — 18. For he hath de-
livered the inhabitants of the land into my hand]. Not the Israeh'tes
but the original Canaanitish peoples are intended, cf. ii< Jos. 2"
18' Nu. 32"- 29. — 19. The ark of the covenant of Yahweh] was at
this time on Mount Zion in a tent which David had prepared for
it, cf. i5'' 28 « I K. 8' = 2 Ch. 52. — And the holy vessels of God].
26o I CHRONICLES
The Chronicler drew upon what was done in the reign of Solomon
(i K. 8< = 2 Ch. 5*) for what he represents as commands of
David.
XXIII-XXIX. The last acts of David.— This passage is best
understood as a unit from the hand of the Chronicler, whose title
is contained in 23'- ', When David was old and full of days, then (i)
he made Solomon his son king over Israel, and (2) gathered together
all the princes of Israel, (3) ivith the priests, (4) and the Levites.
These last acts of David, which concern his son, the princes, the
priests, and the Levites, the Chronicler recounts in reverse order,
as is his habit elsewhere.
According to 2 Ch. 29^, Hezekiah brings in "the priests and the
Levites," then in vv. * s. he addresses the Levites and assigns them their
task and in vv. 21 »■ he commands the priests to do their work. In 2 Ch.
29-" cp. "And the Levites stood with the instruments of David, and the
priests with the trumpets," with "and the trumpets together with the
instruments of David," v. ". For further instances cf. 22'" 22"- '« 256
2620.
Beginning with the Levites (c. 23), the Chronicler narrates
how David divided them into courses in preparation for the new
service in the Temple. The increase in their duties which would
result from the building of the Temple, and the lighter nature of
them (v. 26), led David to reduce the age at which they should begin
service to twenty years (v. i.). Then David, with the assistance of
Zadok and Ahimelech, divided the priests into courses (24'-").
(2420-3' is a later insertion, see in loco.) The account of the
organisation of the singers (c. 25) and that of the gate-keepers
(c. 26) follow. The third act of David's old age, to gather to-
gether the princes of Israel (232), is doubtless introduced to give
an opportunity to describe the military forces and the civil serv-
ice as well organised (c. 27), so that Solomon could devote all
his activity to carrying out the plans of his father concerning
the Temple. This chapter (27) differs from the preceding, since
the organisation or reorganisation of the religious functionaries
is represented as taking place at this time, while the military
and civil officers are simply exhibited as already organised. This
was to be expected, since the former were being prepared for new
XXm. 1-23.] COURSES OF THE LEVITES 261
duties which should come with the completion of the Temple,
while the latter had their duties throughout the reign of David.
The last act of David, "He made Solomon king" (23"=), is nar-
rated in cc. 28/.
XXIII. The Levites. — With this chapter the Chronicler begins
to record the last acts of David. After the superscription (yy. ' =),
he briefly states what provisions David made for the Levitical
oversight of the building of the Temple (w. 3-^), followed by a list
of the heads of Levitical houses who were divided into courses
(w. ^--^), the introduction of a new legal age for service (w. '^-"),
and the duties of the Levites (vv. 26-32)_
Ki. assigns 23^-^ and Bn. 23^^-'- to a hand later than the Chronicler.
The list of Levites, however, should properly be placed first, since the
priests were a subdivision of the tribe of Levi, 23" naturally preceding
c. 24. Benzinger adduces the following reasons against the Chronicler's
authorship of 23^^-^: (i) the description of the Levitical service is
general and out of place here; (2) vv. 24-27 contain a correction of v. 3;
(3) the Chronicler in his preference for the singers would not have
placed this service last. But the general description (i) is rather a
mark of the Chronicler; no actual contradiction (2) exists between vv.
"-27 and V. % since the former deals with the legal age of the Levites after
the Temple should be completed and the latter with the more ancient
legal age (see below on 23^^, also 23^- ^); and (3) the sequence of duties
accounts sufiiciently for the order (cf. c. 25). An account of this Levitical
service is not out of place here, since it follows the appointment of the
younger Levites to public duties and leads up to the description of the
priestly organisation.
1. 2. The superscription to cc. 23-29. — 1. When David was
old and full of days] a statement defining the time of the acts
which follow. — Then he made Solomon his son king] not a nomi-
nation to the kingship, the actual anointing and elevation to the
throne taking place later (29") (Ke., Oe.), but a sub-title which
introduces c. 28 (Bn.). Verse 2 gives the remaining sub-titles,
which the Chronicler has taken up in reverse order (v. s.).
1. tpr] not the adj. but 3pers. sg. pf. of the verb. — a"ic> j?3i;'] so
also in 2 Ch. 24'^; usually as an adj., cf. Gn. 35" Jb. 42".
3-5. The oversight of the service of the Temple. — 3. Now,
the Levites were numbered from thirty years old and upward]. Since
262 I CHRONICLES
w. • ' are a title {v. s.), this statement begins a new section, so the
copulative is better rendered now. The Levites were numbered ac-
cording to the old custom (Nu. 4'- "• '"• ^- "■ "). The Law also
knows of a numbering from twenty-five years old and upward (Nu.
823.26-) (fy_ V. ^). — And their number in men by their polls, was
thirty-eight thousand]. This number is found only here. Accord-
ing to Nu. 3^' the males from one month old and upward num-
bered 22,000 in Moses' time, or 23,000 according to Nu. 26«'.
Those between the ages of thirty and fifty were 2,750 -I- 2,630 -I-
3,200 = 8,580 (Nu. 4=«- *"■ ") {cf. v.2^). — 4. 5. Of these iwenty-Jonr
thousand were to oversee the work {i.e., of building, v. i.) of the
house of Yahweh]. The Temple was built, according to the
Chronicler, under the direct oversight of the Levites. These
24,000 were to have general oversight of the work. Associated
with them in some way in this oversight were 6,000 officers and
judges, 4,000 gate-keepers, and 4,000 singers. Just why these
should have a part in building the house is obscure, unless the
Chronicler thought of them as having the oversight of the build-
ing of their respective quarters. The fact is supported by 2 Ch.
34'2 '•, where the singers, scribes, officers, and gate-keepers had
a part in the oversight of the builders. It is hardly satisfac-
tory to regard these words as glosses in 2 Ch. 34'^ '■ (Bn., Ki.),
since one of these passages supports the other. Thirty-eight
thousand overseers would be unnecessary, but such an exaggera-
tion is natural from the Chronicler (cf. 22'* «• 29= «•). These over-
seers were chosen from the existing body of ofl&cial Levites, namely
those over thirty (v. '), and not from those whose service was to
begin at the age of twenty at the completion of the Temple (cf.
w." ff). — Which I nmde]. The use of the first person indicates
that v\'. " '• contain the words of David. The Chronicler refers
to the musical instruments of David elsewhere, 2 Ch. 29** Ne.
i2'«, cf. Am. 6k
3. ncD«i]. This Niph. is used positively only here. — dp?j'7j'^] pi.
with sf., from r^:)';':; here and in v. ^i head, poll, in which sense only P
and late, cf. Ex. i6'6 3826 Nu. i^- 's. 20. 22 347._3,-,3js-] js a nearer defini-
tion of a.-i'?j'?j':', excluding women. — D^r'^r] Ke. corrects to B'lr;' to
agree with v. ", but see n. there. — 4. m:^] act as overseer, is used in
XXm. 1-23.] COURSES OF THE LEVITES 263
2 Ch. 2'- ", Ezr. 3'- ' 2 Ch. 34"- " of overseeing the workmen in building
or repairing the Temple. The Levites acted as overseers during the
repairing of the Temple under Josiah (2 Ch. 34'^ "s), and also at the
rebuilding when Zerubbabel was governor (Ezr. 3'- ', where the same
phrase ^}ri-' nij naxSo hy nxjS is used), hence it is likely that the
function of these Levites had to do with the oversight of the building of
the house. The Levites did not oversee the work of ministry, but per-
formed it (vv. 24. 28 ff.). — 5, vTii£;j; na'N] (g o^s iiToiricxei' and 13 qua:
jecerat are an effort to make a smoother reading.
6-23. Heads of Levitical houses. — Twenty-two heads of
fathers' houses are usually found here, and various attempts have
been made to increase this number to twenty-four, since there were
twenty-four courses of priests (24'-'8), of singers (25'-"), and of
gate-keepers (262"°), but all have been more or less arbitrary.
The statement of Josephus {^Ant. vii. 14. 7) that David divided
the Levites into twenty-four classes may have been derived from
24''. Bertheau restored the number twenty-four by inserting
Jaaziah with his three sons Shoham, Zaccur, and Ibri (24") into
V. 21, omitting Mahli of v. " as a repetition. Berlin, more recently,
departs from Bertheau only in making this Jaaziah either the son
of Mahli of v. ^^ or of Jerahmeel the son of Kish {JQR. XII. pp.
29s /•)• These emendations are based upon the supposition that
our text has only twenty-two heads of fathers' houses, while accord-
ing to the true interpretation of v. " (^. 7;.) twenty-three should
be counted. Very likely one name has been lost from the text
through corruption, but just where and how remains dubious. — •
6. On names Gerslion, Kehath, Merari, cf. 5" (6'). — 7. La dan
and Shime'i] La dan also in 26^', elsewhere Libni and Shimei, cf.
6' <i7) Ex. 6" Nu. 3'8. Zockler escapes the difficulty by considering
La' dan a descendant of Libni. More recently this view has been
put forward with confidence by Berlin (/. c. p. 292 B). The varia-
tion may be the result of different traditions. La' dan also occurs
as the name of an Ephraimite y^^ f. — 8-11. Ladan had three sons
(v. 8) and Shimei four (v. •»), two of which united to make one
fathers' house, since they had few sons (v. >'). A second Shimei
with three sons is found between these two (v. '"). Although
v. "> connects this Shime'i with the family of Ladan, his relation-
ship is not indicated. J. H. MichaeHs, following Kimchi, con-
264 I CHRONICLES
sidered this SJiimci a son of La dan {Hie Schimhi, inqttil, non est
Gersonis filiiis v. ' sed unus ex Lahdanitis v. «). Berlin (/. c.)
holds that he is a brother of La' dan, both being the sons of Libni
(v. i. text. n.). Still another solution has been suggested by Ben-
zinger, who considers v. '» a gloss which has crept into the wrong
place and properly belonged with v. '", adducing as proof that
V. "> belongs with v. ^. But v. "> as a gloss to v. '" is more inex-
plicable than where it now stands, and v. "^ is unnecessary after v. '.
V. '*' itself is best explained as a gloss inserted to escape the diffi-
culty caused by the two-fold appearance of Shimei. After striking
out V. ^^, the first Shimei (v. S") is to be identified with the second
son of Gershon (v.'), and Shimei ("•yotl*) of v. i" is probably a
textual error for Shelomolh (jy^ch*^). In 24=2 a Jahath is chief
of the sons of Shelomoth, but there the latter is represented as a
son of Izhar. Then v. " is a glossator's attempt to restore the nine
fathers' houses which had been increased to ten by this error
(Bn. regards this verse as a correction). The family of Gershon
formed nine fathers' houses in the original text, viz. :
Gershon
!
I 71
V. ^ Ladan Shimei
V. ^ Jehiel Zetham Joel v. ' Shelomoth Haziel Haran
\
I \ \ 1
V. 1" Jahath Ziza Jeush Beriah
— 8. JehVel the chief] i.e., chief of those over the treasuries of the
house of God 26" ' 29^ — Zetham] and Jo'el] appear as sons of
Jehiel in 26" q. v. Jo'el is possibly the same as Joel in 15'- i'. — 9.
Shelomoth] v. i. — Hazi'el f]. — Haraji] appears elsewhere only as
the name of Abram's brother, the father of Lot Gn. ns'-si -)-, cf. also
the place-name Y\7\ T'^D Nu. 323* = D"!" '2 Jos. 13". — 10. Jahath]
possibly the same as in 6^- ^s c2o. 43) — Ziza^] is probably the correct
reading, cf. v. " and text. n. Ziza is also the name of a Simeonite
4", and a son of Rehoboam 2 Ch. ii^o -j-. — Je'ush]. Cf v. ", also
the name of a son of Rehoboam 2 Ch. ii'^. — Ben ah]. Cf. v. ",
a common name. — 12. The sons of Kehath are given elsewhere in
XXTTT. 1-23.] COURSES OF THE LEVITES 265
the same order, cf. 5^8 (6=) 6' o" 26" Ex. 6^^ Nu. 3". — 13. To
sanctify him as a most holy one] (v. i.). — To hum incense]. Cf.
Ex. 30' «-. — 14. The sons of Moses were reckoned among the tribe
of Levi] and did not share the advantage of the sons of Aaron.
For an ancient tradition of them cf. Ju. iS'". — 15. The sons of
Moses]. Cf. Ex. 18' '• and for the birth of Gershom Ex. 2". —
Eltezer]. Cf. also v. *", a common Levitical name. — 16. Shuba'el*]
(v. i.) became ruler over the treasuries (262^) and is mentioned also
in 24" ". — 17. Rehabiah]. Cf. 24^1 26^5 -j-. — Like that of Gershon,
the family of Kehath is divided into nine heads of fathers' houses.
— 18. Shelomith]. See text. n. on v. ^ — 19. Jeriah]. Cf. 24"
26^' f. — Amariah]. Cf. 24", also 5" (6^). — JahazVel]. Cf. 24='.
Also the name of a Benjaminite 12^ '^t)^ of a priest of David 16%
of a Levite 2 Ch. 20'^, of an ancestor of one of the families of the
restoration Ezr. 8*. — Jekameam]. Cf. 24" j-. — 20. Micah]. Cf.
24=^"; a name not uncommon, f/. 5^ — Isshiah] C/. 24"- 25^ and
as the name of another Levite 24='; elsewhere the name of one
cf David's helpers 12% a man of Issachar 7', one of those with
foreign wives Ezr. lo^' -j-. — 21-23. Possibly six heads of fathers'
houses were derived from Merari in the original text, but all
restorations must rest on conjecture alone (2;. s.). — 21. 22. With
the possible exception of 24=5 '• {q. v.) tradition agrees that
Merari had two sons Mahli and Mnshi, cf. 6^<"> Ex. 6'3 Nu.
333. — Ele'azar and Kish]. Cf. 24" '•. Benzinger regards v. "
as a gloss by the same hand as v. ". This is not probable,
but Eleazar may be counted as a fathers' house without con-
sidering V. " a gloss. According to the later law, where there
were no sons, daughters inherited, and with the express pur-
pose of preventing a man's name from being lost to his family
(Nu. 2j*), but such daughters must marry only into the family of
the tribe of their father (Nu. 36'). In v. " it is stated that these
conditions were fulfilled in the case of Eleazar and doubtless the
verse was added to show why Eleazar was also counted among
the fathers' houses though he was known to have had no sons. —
23. Mahli] the grandson of Merari is mentioned only in 24'°
and 6^2 ^*t\ but as the name of a son of Merari v." 2426- =8 54. m
(19. 29) Ezr. 8'8 Ex. 6" Nu. 3'° f. — 'Eder] is also mentioned in
266 I CHRONICLES
24=" f; cj. also place-name 'Eder in extreme south of Judah
Jos. 15=' |. — Jeremoili\ in 2430 written Jerimoth (v. i.), cf. 7'.
This list of the sons of Mushi is only found here and 24'°.
6. 30^"'.?] Baer, Gin.; some MSS. opSn^.i. Probably should be Pi.
D|?.'?'!i'., BDB., Bn., cf. 24^ — 7. Berlin {v. s.) supposes the original to
have read: '>'-':'M"'>'^ ['ja*? •'J3 "'>::cm "':3'^] •'ju'j'^. — 9. nic'i't'] Qr.
n-^pSw, (&^ 'AXudein, a corruption of * SaXwjotei0=n'C — ,cf. v. " 24"-
22 2625 f- 28. Qr. is followed by Zoe., Oe., Ki., Bn., but there is no
necessity for reducing all these names to the same form. — '^x'Tn] v. i.
V. ". — 10. Nr;] in V. " n;<T, (^ Ztfa, H Ziza and one MS. cited by
Kennic. npt, which is probably original, so BDB. — 11. .ins ^^|■1D';|]
for one class of officers, see BDB. ^"^po 2 c, or possibly for one appoint-
ment, which suits 24^ ''. — 13. z^Z'^p cnp vi'npn'?] "B ut tninistraret in
sancto sanctorum, so §, Zoe., Oe., but the holy of holies elsewhere 'C'-^P
'pn. Without the art. the phrase is used of holy things connected with
worship, cf. Ex. 30'° Lv. 2^, accordingly EVs. read that he should sanctify
the most holy things. Then the suffix must be a subjective genitive.
The most natural rendering "to sanctify him, a most holy one" was
accepted by Be., Ke. Ki. mentions it as a possibility, but leaves the
question doubtful, since the expression is not used of persons else-
where.— 12;'3] cf. 16= Dt. lo^ 21^ 2 S. 618 ps. 1298 also Nu. 6" «•.
— 14. Sy ix-)p'] cf. Ezr. 26' = Ne. 7". — 16. ■'ja] pi. when only one son
follows, cf. 2". — ''!<i3u-] 26" '^>>'3"f, 24-" ':'N3vj', ($ here 'Zoxi^arfK, which
should be read with Oe., Bn., Ki., cf. Sab. proper noun '^.vai.^. — 18.
r.^n'^v'] 242= ■r^■z'^y, v. s. v. » text, n.— 19. ^Nnn'] (g" 'OftTjX, a
lafnjX, U Jahazi-el. Ki. supposes ' to be the result of a dittogra-
phy from the preceding •■y^ and then resolves this 'i'Nnn into '^n'i>; on
the basis of (B^. This change introduces a second '^sn;' into this
list and also in 2420 *-, which though not impossible is not likely.
Such forms as ':'!<vn (v. ') and "^vsnri; exist side by side, cf. '?N'i;7.
(4'^) and '"'ti^Vi!! (11" 2721). The evidence of CI is vitiated by the fact
that in i6« and 2 Ch. 20" '^Nnn'' is rendered 'Of(e)t^X. Ki. ques-
tions the latter but passes over the former without comment. — 23.
n^27^] 24'" nio>T', (S^ in both places 'Apeiudd, ^ lapifiud and lepifuaO,
"M Jerimoth.
24-27. Legal age for Temple service. — 24. From twenty years
old and upward]. Various attempts have been made to reconcile
this statement with that in v. ', according to which the Levites
were numbered from thirty years old and upward. The older
commentators explained the apparent discrepancy on the ground
f
XXm. 24-32.] AGE AND DUTIES OF THE LEVITES 267
that David first numbered the Levites from thirty years old accord-
ing to the Law (Nu. 4=) and then later from twenty years old
since there was no further need of transporting the sanctuary
(so J. H. Mich., also Kimhi). That the Chronicler had two
variant traditions contained in different sources has also been
suggested (Be.). After describing all attempts to get rid of the
discrepancy as makeshifts, Ke. arbitrarily emends v. ', reading
twenty for thirty. Recent commentators ascribe w. ^^ ^- to a
later hand. In later times, apparently, the Levites were eligible
to service from twenty years old and upward. The scarcity of
numbers was the probable cause for the change {cf. Ezr. 2" 8'^ «•).
The Chronicler, however, makes this practice the rule for the
whole post-exilic period (Ezr. y) and also carries it back as far
as the reign of Hezekiah (2 Ch. 31"). He would hardly leave the
matter there. The proper time for the institution of the new
custom was at the building of the Temple. As the Chronicler
ascribed the organisation of the Temple service to David {cf. 2 Ch.
8'< ff ), so he made him responsible also for this change. In v.'
he necessarily gave the enumeration from thirty years old and
upward, since this enumeration was made that David could
provide for overseeing the building of the Temple and only
experienced Levites would be chosen for this task (see vv. ^-^).
When David divided the Levites into courses (v. «) to do the work
for the service of the house of Yahweh (v. 2^), after it should be
completed, the younger men from twenty years old and upward
were included among those eligible for service. — 27. For by the
last words of David, the number of sons of Levi was from twenty
years old and upward]. No new census is supposed, as EVs.
imply. David decreed that the younger men should also serve
but did not provide for a recount.
24. onmpo] cf. Nu. i^' «• Ex. 30'*. — niCB' iDDca] cf. Nu. i'«
3". — opSjSj^] v. s. v. « text. n. — ni;-;] other MSB. •'1:7, cf. Ne. ills'
and Ezr. 3^ m'-j with Ne. 13'° ^Z'V both pi. Only another way of writing
the same form. — 27. o^jinnsn T^n n3i3] Be. following Kimhi ren-
dered "In the later histories of David" and so also Oe., Ba.; but
Be. was influenced by the theory that the Chronicler used two sources.
Better render by the last words (or commands) of David, as U jitxta prcs-
268 I CHRONICLES
cepta, so J. H. Mich., Ke., Zoe., Bn., Ki., cf. 2 S. 23'. — ncn] Ke. took
as neuter sg. (Ew. § ^18 /)), since ricn is nowhere found with the signifi-
cation cunt, and rendered "'This,' i.e., this was done, viz., the number-
ing of the Levites," but cf. ai n*^}* Nu. 3-'', and Ges. § 141^. /;. Here
r^-or^ agrees with and strengthens 'iS 'J3 as the most important part of
the compound subject ''i'? ^J3 idDS, Ges. § 146U.
28-32. Duties of the Levites. — 29. For the shoivbread] lit.
bread of rows, cf. g^\ — and for the fine flour for the meal-oflcring]
cf. Lv. 2'- ■•• ^, — whether for the unleavened wafer] cf. Lv. 2', —
or of that which is baked in a pan] cf. Lv. 2= 6'^ ^^d^ — qj- [Jiqi
which is mixed] cf. Lv. 6'* <2", — and for the measures of capacity
and the measures of length] cf. Ex. 29^° 30=''. The Levites may
have been the keepers of standard measures, cf. Lv. 1935. — 30.
On the morning and evening burnt-offerings cf. Ex. 29«'- " Nu.
28' -8. — 31. And (to stand, etc.) at every offering of a burnt-offer-
ing]. EVs. and to offer all, etc., is a mistranslation {v. i.).
Besides the Sabbaths {cf. Nu. 28 » ' ) and new moons {cf. Nu.
28" -'5), there were three annual historical feasts (Ex. 23'^-"),
Passover and Mazzoth (Nu. 28'^ -=5), Pentecost (Nu. 282s -s'), and
Tabernacles (Nu. 29'2-3s). — 32. According to the Law, the Levites
should keep the charge of the tent of meeting (Nu. iS'- *) and the
charge of the sons of Aaron their brethren (Nu. 3^ iS^- =) but they
were expressly forbidden to approach the vessels of the holy place
(Nu. 18', cf. however i Ch. 9-') and the priests were given the
charge of the holy place (Nu. 18^). BUchler (/. c.) has used this
as evidence of a priestly source which has become confused by
the Chronicler's introduction of the Levites, but a variant tradi-
tion ascribes this duty to Levites (Nu. 328- '2). The Chronicler
could have secured all his facts from Nu. 3 without consulting
Nu. 18.
28. '^:h mn-j] cstr. before S, cf. Ges. § 130a. — ® evidently read
"ryi (iirl) before nc'vo and B ^3 Syi (et in universis). (S also omits the
copulative at the beginning of v. 29. As the text stands the repetition of
inin>) D^n'^xn n"'3 rnimy adds nothing. Hence ^sb should be emended
to agree with (& and connected with the following verse, 'n Dn'?S (omit
1 with Ci>) defining nryn more closely, cf. Ges. § 131/. Accordingly
read 'n onSS o^nSxn p^a may hb'jjd Sjn and in the work of the service of
the house of God for (in respect to) the showbread. — 31. niSy mSyn "jaSi]
XXIV. 1-19.] COURSES OF THE PRIESTS 269
EVs. render incorrectly and to offer all burnt-offerings. This verse is
a part of v. ^o and can only be translated and at every offering of burnt-
offerings (Kau.). The priest had the exclusive duty of offering the burnt-
offering but the Levite had to stand . . . to thank and to praise (v. '")
while the offering was being made. Some commentators have held that
the verse refers to the duty of the Levites to procure and prepare the
animals for sacrifice (Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.), an attempt to account for
the apparent anomaly of Levites offering the burnt-offering. By the
same misunderstanding of the text, Biichler (/. c. p. 131 f. n.) has been
led to the conclusion that v. '' belonged to a source which concerned
itself only with the priests. — 32.' CS omits i:-ipn motJ'a n>si, which may be
an intentional correction from Nu. i8^ where this duty is given to the
sons of Aaron, or more probably the omission is due to homoeoteleuton.
XXIV. 1-19. The courses of the priests. — The account of
the duties of the Levites in serving the priests (23 "-32) is followed
immediately by the description of David's organisation of the
priests (24'-''). These were divided into twenty-four courses
which cast lots for places. The order, Levites (c. 23), priests
(c. 24), was likely determined by the fact that the priests were a
subdivision of the tribe of Levi; 23 '^ could not follow 24'
I 1-19
Schurer (Gesch.^ II. p. 237) has questioned the genuineness of 24'-'^
suspicioning that this list was not framed until the Hasmonean period,
since the class of Jehoiarib, from which the Hasmoneans sprang (i Mac.
2'), is placed first contrary to Ne. 12'-'- '2-21^ but this evidence is not con-
clusive and can only be used to question the relative position of the
class of Jehoiarib. That may have been altered through later influence.
1-19. The twenty-four courses of priests. — 1. The sons of
Aaron are given in the same order in 5=^ (6=) Ex. 6^\ — 2. An
abridgment of Nu. 3^ Nadab and Abihu offered strange fire
before Yahweh and were devoured by fire (Lv. 10' -' Nu. y).
— 3. Zadok and Ahimelech, the leading representatives of the
two families of Aaron, were associated with David in dividing the
priests into their courses. Earlier writers would probably have
assigned this task to David alone, but not so the Chronicler (cf.
2 S. 8'8 with I Ch. 18"'; also 25'). Ahimelech is associated with
Zadok in v. '' and in i8'« (where Ahimelech should be read
Ahimelech with Vrss.). According to v. « and iS'^ (= 2 S. 8")
Ahimelech was the son of Abiathar, but in i S. 22-" an Ahimelech
270 I CHRONICLES
is the father of Ahiathar. That grandfather and grandson should
bear the same name is in accord with common Semitic practice {cf.
^35 t. (59 f.) and Phoenician Eshmunezar Inscription hnes 13/.),
but the only knowTi son of Abiathar was named Jonathan (2 S.
i5'« I K. i-i^) and elsewhere Zadok and Abiathar (instead of
Ahimelech) are associated as the priests, both in the time of David
(2 S. 15" 17'^ I Ch. 15") and in the time of Solomon (i K. 4% cf.
also I K. I' with i"), hence the probability that the two names
were transposed through corruption in 2 S. 8'" before the Chron-
icler wrote (see EBi. art. Abiathar). — 4. Chief men]. Possibly
the heads of individual households which constituted the sub-
divisions of a fathers' house ((f. Jos. 715 -is) (Ke., Zoe., Oe.),
though more probably the heads of fathers' houses are intended
(Be.). The last clause of v. ^» should be taken with what follows
— and they, i.e., David, Zadok, and Ahimelech, assigned them, of
the sons of Ele'azar sLxteen heads of fathers^ houses and of the sons
of Ithamar eight fathers^ houses. Some Levites who were not of
the family of Zadok ministered in the second Temple although
they were not eligible to the high priesthood. At least, a
certain Daniel of the sons of Ithamar returned with Ezra (Ezr.
8^). The Chronicler assumed this later superiority of the
Zadokites also for the time of David and assigned sixteen classes
to the sons of Eleazar — i.e., to the Zadokites — and eight to
the sons of Ithamar. These numbers sixteen and eight are
clearly artificial, since they are related to each other as the
rights of a first-born to a single younger brother {if. Dt. 21'").
Upon the deaths of Nadab and Abihu without sons, the right of
the first-bom fell to Eleazar. The high priesthood also fell to the
Zadokites as the right of the first-bom. — 5. So they divided them
by lot one like the other (lit. these ivith those)]. Apart from having
a double share of classes and the high priesthood, the descendants
of Eleazar-Zadok had no advantage over their fellow-priests, for
in both families were found princes of the sanctuary and princes of
God. These two terms are probably syrunymous, being differ-
ent designations also for the "chiefs of the priests" of 2 Ch. 36'<
(Ba., Bn.). — 6. Shema'lah the son of Nathaniel, the scribe] is
only known from this passage. — One fathers^ house being taken
XXIV. 1-19.] COURSES OF THE PRIESTS 271
for Eleazar and one* taken for Ilhamar] (v. i.). — 7-18. The same
courses were maintained in the time of Josephus (Ant. vii. 14. 7,
Vita i). Individual courses are mentioned elsewhere, Jehoiarib
(Joarib), i Mac. 2' Bab. Taanith 29 a; Joiarib and Jeda'iah,
Baba kamtna ix. 12; Abijah, Lu. 1°; Bilgah. Sukka v. 8 (see Schiir.
Gesch.^ II. pp. 22)2 ff.). Jehoiarib, Jeda'iah, IJarim, Malchijah,
Mijamin, Abijah, Shecaniah, Bilgah, Maaziah occur in either
one or both lists of priests in Ne. 10' «• <2 « ' and 12' "J-. Se'orim,
Huppah, Jeshebe^ab, Happizzez, and Gatmd do not occur elsewhere.
On Jehoiarib, Jeda'iah, Jachin, cf. 9'°. The descendants of
Jeda'iah, of Harim, and of Immer returned from the exile under
Zerubbabel (Ezr. 2'^ '• " = Ne. 7'' '• '^), but Pashiir (Ezr. 2'8 =
Ne. 7^0 is wanting here. The children of Hakkoz were debarred
from the priesthood after the return since they could not find
their record in the genealogies (Ezr. 2" = Ne. 7"). Jeshu'a may
be the head of the "house of Jeshua" of Ezr. 23« = Ne. 7^^ No
connection between Eliashib and the post-exilic high priest of
that name (Ne. 3') is probable, since the name was a common
one. Jakim and Pethahiah occur only here as the names of
priests. Jehezkel is also the name of the well-known priest and
prophet, son of Buzi, Ez. i' 242* f.
1. (&^ omits the second l^ns >i2, so also Origan's text (Field), but ifl
is probably original. — Nin>:iN] (g 'A/3tou5 here and in v. 2 529 (6') Ex.
6-3 Lv. 10' Nu. 3^ — 3. (S adds Kar oikovs naTpiQv avruv. — 5. ":33i]
read with other Mss. •'J32% so H,®, g", Ki.— 6. ins thni . . . inx -inx].
Some late MSS. read ins ipni instead of :nN tn>si; ® els eh . . . eh els;
^ 1 1- ..] ^so l-M ^.*i^|_D, Most commentators correct
the second inN to nns (Grotius, Ges., Zoe., Kau., Ba., Bn.). Be. retained
M, finding a relation in the proportion eight to sixteen and thn to
ins tnNi, i.e., two lots were drawn for Eleazar to each one for Ith-
amar. Ke. pointed out that the text would then imply, that the two
lots were drawn for Ithamar, not for Eleazar {cf. also Oe.). Ki. has
sought to overcome this objection by transposing Eleazar and Ithamar,
but Eleazar is elsewhere mentioned first (vv. ^- '• * ^- ^). A comparison
of 252-'' with 259-3' shows that there the houses were taken alternately
until the two smaller families were exhausted; then the remaining
names of the large family of Heman were divided into two groups.
These were taken alternately {cf. 258-3') until all had been assigned.
According to this analogy, the older and simpler emendation — the
272 I CHRONICLES
second ins to ins — gives the true original. The lot alternated between
the descendants of Elcazar and the descendants of Ithamar until the
number of the latter was exhausted, when the remaining eight houses
of Eleazar were assigned places by lot. Then Nos. 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12,
14, 16, in vv. '"" were members of the family of Ithamar, the rest
belonging to the family of Eleazar. — 13. 3s:iri] (S" omits but ^^
IffpaaX, B'^ Isbaal. Ki. conjectures that the original form was Syar'',
which was omitted in the copy of Greek and intentionally altered
in M because of the offence caused by the form ^^'J. Gray {HPN.
p. 24) follows Ki. — 19. Dniiis] Ki. points ar'.'\pD because of the preced-
ing n'^s.
20-31. A supplementary list of Levites. — This second
list of the sons of Levi has many names in common with 23'--'
but also adds several new ones. The family of Gershon is
omitted and a new subdivision is added to the family of Merari.
Six new heads or chiefs, Jehdeiah, Isshiah, Jahath, Shamir,
Zechariah, and Jeralmie'el, supplant six of the older heads of fathers'
houses and are represented as the chiefs of their descendants, but
are not necessarily their sons. Bertheau held that these verses
were written in order to add the chiefs of the classes enumerated in
2^7-23 but in some cases the writer did not have the information
which he needed and so simply repeated what he had already
given in 23' ff-; and the family of Gershon was omitted, since the
writer had nothing to add, hence to include this family would
make an unnecessary repetition. The fact that only six such
chiefs are given out of a possible twenty-three or twenty-four is
against this view. The account of the Levites, given in c. 23, is
connected so closely with the priests (24'-'') that the natural place
for a supplementary list of Levites would be after the latter rather
than between the two. The Chronicler would be as likely to
place such an additional catalogue here as a later glossator. The
fact that some of the names here are repeated from 23 '^ ^ does not
in itself militate against the proposition that the Chronicler was
the author of both passages. Nevertheless, there are good reasons
for suspecting the Chronicler's authorship of this second list of
Levites, and for ascribing it to a later hand (so Ki. SBOT., Bn.).
Shuba'el (Shebu'el) is called the chief of the sons of Gershom in
23'* but here his place is taken by Jehdeiah. In 23'', Rehabiah
XXIV. 20-31.] SUPPLEMENTARY LIST OF LEVITES 273
is called the chief of the sons of Eliezer but here (v. '") he is sup-
planted by Isshaiah. The same is true of Shelomith {Shelonwth)
(cf. V. 22 with 23 '8); Micah and Isshiah (cf. vv. ^*- " with 232°); and
Kish (cf. V. 29 with 2322). AH of these names could have been in-
cluded in 23 '5 «f-, since they do not add to or subtract from the
number of fathers' houses. As they stand we have two chiefs for
the same house in six cases. Either new families had gained the
chief positions formerly held by the chiefs of c. 23 or the Chronicler
gave preference to his friends which a later writer contradicted.
"The rest" at the head of this list suggests a supplementary
catalogue not only to c. 23 but also to cc. 25. 26, since the sing-
ers, gate-keepers, and other officers were also Levites. The quota-
tion of a part only of 23=-, "and he had no sons," in v. =8^ un-
wittingly gives the opposite meaning to this passage. According
to 2322 Eleazar must be counted as a father's house (cf. 2321 < ),
but here he is excluded. "These were the sons of the Levites
after their fathers' houses" (v. "">) is a strange subscription to
what purports to be only a partial list of the Levites (cf. "the rest"
V. -o), but is easily understood as a quotation of the first part of
232-' (v. i. V. 30). "These likewise" (C" DJ) (v. 3>) occurs only
here, though the phrase would be in place in 25 « or 26'=. Properly,
this lot should be cast for all the Levites, not for the part of them
in this list to whom "these " must refer. The lots might have been
cast in the presence of Zadok and Ahimelech (v. ^i) very fittingly,
but we should expect "chiefs of the Levites" in the light of 15"- '«,
or only David after 23". However, v. ^'^/^ is simply repeated from
V. ^ — 20. And of the rest of the sons of Levi] not those who re-
mained after the priests had been subtracted (Be.) nor those who
assisted the priests in the service of the house (Ke., Zoe., Oe.), but
a glossator's title to a list containing additional names. That this
list contains many names set forth in 23 •=■23 cannot be urged against
this conclusion (as Be.), since those names are given in order to
place the new ones in relationship to them. — Shuba'el]. Cf. 23 '^
— Jehdeiah] is also the name of an officer of David 27'" f. — 21.
Rehabiah]. Cf 23". — Isshiah] occurs again in v. 25^ cf. 232°. —
22. Shelomoth]. Cf Shelomith 2^^K—Jahath]. Cf 42.-23. Cf
23". — 24. Micah]. Cf 2320. — Shamir] here only as a personal
iS
274 I CHRONICLES
name, but as a place-name Ju. lo'- « Jos. 15*' f. — Isshiah]. CJ.
23". — ZecJwriah] a very common name, especially in the writ-
ings of the Chronicler. — 26. 27. The sons of Merari: Mahli and
Mushi and* the sons of'Uzziah. The sons of Merari: of 'Uzziah*
Bani* ( ?) and Shoham and Zaccur and 'Ibri]. The WTiter inserted
among the sons of Merari as he found them in 23^' «■ the family
of 'Uzziah, who had three or four sons. This 'Uzziah was not a
son of Merari but the head of a family claiming descent from him,
otherwise he would have been added directly to Mahli and Mushi
without the intervening the sons of. The addition of his son after
'Uzziah in v. ^e (H Benno, EVs. Beno) contradicts this fact directly
by making 'Uzziah a son of Merari, wherefore it is necessary to
consider the sons 0/ before, or his son after, 'Uzziah a gloss. Kittel
does the former {i.e., he resolves ">23 into Dj") but it is neither
likely that Merari had another son besides Mahli and Mushi {cf.
54 (19) 23" Ex. 6'' Nu. 3" =') nor that the original writer would
have had the boldness to add another son to the two so well known.
The second alternative, i.e., to regard his son after 'Uzziah as a
gloss, is more likely and has the support of (§>. Beno (EVs.) in
V. " must either be struck out with the following copulative or it
is a corruption for Bani, a common late name, which te.xt is sup-
ported by (§ {viol avTov = T'JS = '^ "^12) {v. •/.). — The origin of
this family of Uzziah cannot be determined. Shoham occurs
nowhere else as a proper name and 'Ibri only as the gentilic of
Hebrew. Zaccur occurs only once outside of Ch.-Ezr.-Ne., Nu.
13* (P). — 28. And he had no sons] is repeated from 23" evidently
as an abridgment of that verse {v. s.). — KisJi], Cf. 2y-K —
Jerahme'el] also the name of the well-known family in southern
Judah, cf. 2', and of the son of King Jehoiakim Je. 36=^ — 30.
After copying 23" ( = v. '"=') the writer continued with the first
clause of 23^4 (= v. '<"'). — 31. No difficulty need be found in the
fact that twenty-four heads of families are not given in this list.
The glossator based this statement upon what was done in the
case of the priests (vv. « « ) and did not trouble himself to make his
catalogue correspond to the right number.
20. ^n2Yi'] cf. 23" text. n. — 21. Bn. omits mnm >:2^ with <S
but compare the style in w.'"- ". — 23. M and Vrss. are defective. Add
XXV. 1-31.J COURSES OF THE SINGERS ^-f^
after 'J3i. CNin jnjn, Ki., Bn. Earlier commentators added only
]y-\27\ Luther, Be. — 24. -\-\i2t''\ so Kt., but Qr. I'SU', C& ^a/jL-fip, 13 Samir,
and so ©. — 26. 27. The present Hebrew text of these verses cannot
possibly be the original, since v. ^sb jg self-contradictory {v. s.) and
the copulative % lacking before 'J3, must be inserted (Bn.) and ij3
crept in possibly from v. ". inv^-i^ found only here, is probably an
error for iim^', so Ki., cf. also BDB., Gray, HPN. p. 291. 1J3 of
v. " may have read '■:2 originally {v. s.). Accordingly the original text
read 'in 'n onci ija invjjS ''tid ij3 ■. inv^* >j3i ^•^•:^^ ^'?na ma ''J3. (On
attempts to find here the original of 23-' ^•, r/. 23''-".)
XXV. The courses of the singers. — The singers formed a
distinct and important class in the Temple worship when the Chron-
icler wrote. Their special duties and privileges were the result of
historical development just as in the case of the Levites proper and
the Aaronites, but the Chronicler believed that the system of his
own time originated with David. Probably three distinct classes,
the sons of Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun ( = Ethan) respectively,
were already prominent in the time of the Chronicler. Accord-
ing to this chapter they were divided into twenty-four courses
corresponding to those of the priests (24' ^■) and probably also
of the Levites originally (23^ ^■). Doubtless the Chronicler
thought that corresponding courses of each of these orders served
at the same time, the Levites to prepare the sacrifices, the priests
to make the offering, while the singers stood by and sang praises
to Yahweh (233° f ). The Chronicler's order, Levites (c. 23),
priests (c. 24), and singers (c. 25), was not unlikely influenced by
this sequence of duties. We cannot be certain from this chapter
that there were twenty-four courses of singers even in the Chron-
icler's time, since the number may simply represent an ideal of
the writer. The peculiarity of the last nine names {v. i.) rather
supports the latter possibility.
This chapter is certainly a unity and from the Chronicler. Recently
proposed analyses have created more difficulties than they have ex-
plained. Asaph is the only one of the three families of singers mentioned
in vv. ' s , but it does not follow, as Kittel thinks, that this chapter in
its original form only dealt with Asaphites. The presence of idn"^ in
V. ' really proves that all three families were enumerated in the following
verses, since the name — unless it is a gloss resulting from a dittography
276 I CHRONICLES
(so Bn. and Ki. on another page) — must have been inserted to call atten-
tion to the advantage the Asaphites received in having the first lot fall
to them (f/. what Josephus says of the first of the twenty-four courses
of priests, Vita, I. : iroWr] 5^ k&v rourq) 8ia(popd). The artificial
character of the last nine names of v. * (v. i.) indicates nothing
concerning their source. They are as difficult to understand from a
glossator as from the Chronicler, and the number twenty-four points to
the latter. It cannot be shown that the Chronicler was not interested
in this number without doing violence to the text.
1-8. The singers according to their families. — 1. David and
the chiefs of the serving host^] i.e., the chiefs of the Levites {cf. 15'")
who were in active service — those between the ages of thirty and
fifty years (y. /.). — Asaph, Heman, and Jediithiin (= Ethan) were
descended from Gershom (read Gershon), Kehath, and Merari
respectively according to 6^^-^'^ (33-47)^ thus representing the three
chief famines of the Levites {cf. 15"- '^ 16" ^- 2 Ch. 5'^ 29'3 '•
35'^). — Who should prophesy]. The Chronicler gives to the
service of song the same dignity as to the service of exhortation,
i.e., he ranks the singers with the prophets of Israel, thus placing
them above the ordinary serving Levites. Elsewhere he calls
them seers, a term to him synonymous with prophets (cf. v. ' and
references there cited) and in 2 Ch. 20'* ^- he makes a singer actu-
ally figure in a prophetic capacity. A close connection, however,
always existed between the musical function and the prophetic
office (cf I S. 10* '• '" ^•). — With lyres, with lutes and with cymbals]
(see Bn. Arch. pp. 2']2ff., also art. Music in DB. and EBi., cf. 15"^).
— And the number of them]. The number is not the one recorded
in V. ' but refers to the numbers in the succeeding verses, i.e., four
sons of Asaph (although the number is not expressly stated in v. ^),
six sons of Jeduthun (v. '), and fourteen sons of Heman (v. ').
The total number of these together with their brethren is given in
V. '. (An exact parallel is found in Ezr. 2"^^ = Ne. y"- where also
some families are mentioned in the succeeding verses although
their number is omitted, the total sum being given at the end,
Ezr. 2«^ = Ne. y^s.) Hence w. =-' cannot be considered an inser-
tion on the ground that v. > ^ demands that a number should follow
which is not found until v. ' (Bn., Ki.). — 2. This list of the sons
of Asaph is otherwise unknown, Zaccur, also v.'", being the only
XXV. 1-31.] COURSES OF THE SINGERS 277
one mentioned elsewhere as a son of Asaph (Ne. 12'^ cf. also Zichri
1 Ch. 9'5 = Ne. II" where "»"i3T should be read for ''IDT). On
the name cf. 42s and 24". — Joseph} also v. ', besides the frequently
mentioned son of Jacob, is the name of a man of Issachar Nu.
13', of one who took strange wives Ezr. lO''-, of a priest Ne. i2'<.
— Nethaniah] also v. '^^ is found only once elsewhere as a Levite
name 2 Ch. 17^ |. — Asar'elah]. Cf. Jesar'elah v. •< |. — The sons
of Asaph were under the guidance of their father and he in turn
prophesied at the direction of the King. — 3. Only five sons of
Jeduthun are given although he is said to have had six. Shimei
(''y i3ty) of V. " must be the missing name, since it is not found
in vv. ^■* as are all the others enumerated in w. ' =', hence it
should be inserted after Jeshaiah (thus (g). — Of these six sons
of Jeduthun only Mattithiah is mentioned in another place, cf.
1^18. 21 155^ but there he is not called a son of Jeduthun. On the
name cf. 9^'. — Gedaliah] also v. ', not elsewhere the name of a Levite,
but the name of a priest Ezr. 10", and otherwise not infrequent. —
Izri*] so read with v. " instead of Zeri f {v. i.). — Jeshaiah] also
V. '5, besides the well-known prophet Isa'iah, is a Levitical name
26^'* Ezr. 8", a grandson of Zerubbabel 3*", a chief of the sons of
Elam Ezr. 8', a Benjaminite Ne. ii^ — Shimei*] also v. ",
eleven times elsewhere in the writings of the Chronicler as a Le-
vitical name, and otherwise frequent. — Hashabiah] also v. '», is
a name found only in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. (15 times in all), mostly of
Levites. — 4. A Mattaniah appears as an Asaphite in 9'^ = Ne.
II'" Ne. II" 128- 35 2 Ch. 2oi< 29". With the possible exception of
2 Ch. 20'* a son of Asaph is not intended, since the name is used
of a later individual. The name appears fifteen times in Ch.-
Ezr.-Ne., and elsewhere only 2 K. 24". — Bukkiah] also v. " f .
— 'Uzzi'el] in v.'' 'Azar'el. The former is a frequent Levitical
name and the latter appears as the name of priests in Ne. ii'^ 12^'
(v. i.). — Shtiba^el*]. So read with (^ and v. 2° instead of Shebu^el
(Ki.). Also the name of a son of Gershom 23'8 242°- 2° 26^4 |.
— Jerimoth] v. « Jeremoth, is found fourteen times in Ch.-Ezr.-
Ne., but not elsewhere. — Hananiah] also v. ", is a frequent name,
but not elsewhere Levitical. — Hanani] also v. "^^y was the name
of a chief musician in the time of Nehemiah Ne. 12^', and is
278 I CHRONICLES
not infrequent. — EWathah] also v." f. — Giddalti] also v." f. —
Romamti-'ezer] also v." f. — Joshbekashah] also v." -j-. — Mallothi]
also V. " f . — Hothir] also v. ^s -j-. — Mahazi'oth] also v. '» f . — It has
long been recognised that the last eight or nine words, although
intended here for proper names, are almost impossible as the
names of real individuals. With only slight changes in the vocal-
isation and in the separation of the consonants, they form a prayer,
which may be translated as follows:
Be gracious unto me, Oh Yah, he gracious unto me,
Thou art my God whom I magnify and exalt.
Oh my help (or Thou art my help) when in trouble, I say.
He giveth (or Give) an abundance of visions.
(V. i.) Why what was possibly an ancient prayer should thus
be resolved into proper names cannot be determined. The diffi-
culty is not removed by assigning it to a later hand. See Ew.
Lehrh. d. hebr. Spr. p. 680; We. Prol. p. 219; WRS. OTJC.^
p. 143; Koberle, Tempelsdnger, pp. lit f. — 5. Heman, the king's
seer]. Gad is called "David's seer" (21'), Asaph simply "the
seer" (2 Ch. 29=°) and Jeduthun "the king's seer" (2 Ch. 35''), or
if (i» there is correct Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun were the King's
seers (01 7rpo(f)i)TaL rov /SacriXetu?); see further on v. '. — In the
words of God] may mean either in divine affairs (cf. 26'-), or by
the commands of Yahweh {cf. 2 Ch. 29'^). — To lift up his * horn
God gave, etc.]. To lift up the horn would stand alone here in
the sense of blow the horn (Be., Ba., BDB.). Better ignore the
Massoretic pointing (Athnach under pjip) and connect with the
following (v. i.). Elsewhere the phrase means to heighten the
power of any one (cf. i S. 2'" Ps. Sg'^ 92" 148'^ La. 2''). God
exalted the power of Heman by giving him many children (Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Bn., Ki.). — 6. All these] may refer to all the sons of
Asaph, Jeduthun, and Heman (Ke., Zoe., Oe.), but better only to
the fourteen sons of Heman (Be.). Not only the singular their
father but also the similar statements after the sons of Asaph
(v. 2) and of Jeduthun (v. ^) support this conclusion. — In his
characteristic fashion the Chronicler reverses the order of the
XXV. 1-31.] COURSES OF THE SINGERS 279
instruments in repeating them from v. '. — 7. The total number
finds its natural place here after the enumeration of the heads of
houses {cf. V. '). With each of the above twenty-four were asso-
ciated eleven of their brethren, i.e., members of the singers' guild,
so that the total number was two hundred and eighty-eight
(24 X 12). These were the accomplished musicians, skilful ones
{Wy^'2'i^), who were distinguished from the mass of the singers,
the scholars (CT'O^n), as is shown by v. ». Presumably the lat-
ter are included among the 4,000 singers who were assigned some
work in overseeing the building of the Temple {cf. 23^ ' ).
1. N3xn 'i^'i]. The usual rendering the captains of the hosts (EVs.,
Ki., et al.) may be understood as referring eitlier to the commanders of the
army or as synonymous with princes of Israel considered as the host of
Yahweh {cf. Ex. 12"- "). Keil preferred the latter and identified these
princes with those mentioned in 23^ 24^ (so also Zoe., Oe., Bn.). But
there is no reason why David should be assisted either by the com-
manders of the army or by the princes of Israel. When David divided
the priests he was assisted by the two leading priests, Zadok and Ahime-
lech (24'), so by analogy he should be assisted by the princes of the
Levites here. Previously David commanded the princes of the Levites
(D^i^n ^1-') to appoint singers from their brethren (15"). Although
N3S n:* is not used of the Levites elsewhere, as Keil pointed out,
the phrase may refer to them in this case, since n2S is used of the
Levites in Nu. 43- 23. 30. 35. 39. « g^*- ^\ In all of these passages K3X
is used in connection with the age at which the Levites were qual-
ified for service in the tent of meeting. In Nu. 4'^- '^- " the phrase
reads n>'iD Snxa ma;''? KTsh usually rendered " service for the work
in the tent of meeting," and in Nu. S^^ ma;'n Naxa " from the service
of the work." In the latter case, the sense is certainly " active serv-
ice." Now it is to be noted that in our passage this same majjS
follows N3S"i. If mayS were intended to describe the service rendered
by the singers, it should have appeared in connection with its qualifying
clause 'aa D\x>ajn. Immediately following Nasn iTi', mayS is most
naturally taken as a genitive modifying Naxn in the same sense as in
Nu. 8-5, and is better rendered the chiefs of the serving host. — ID** ^i^^
pnnn icni] on co-ordinate genitives depending upon the same no-
men regens, cf. Ges. § 128a. — a''N^a:n] Qr. 0''Na:n. ($ dirocpOeyyofiivovs.
Najn in vv. ^ «■ favours Qr., and so Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., et al. — ^tt'JN DnoDD
'd] irjN in apposition with d-isdc, cf. Ges. § 13 iw. — 2. dSnie-n] so
Baer, Gin., Ki.; also written hSnib-vS, cf v. " n'7Nni?'v — 3. nx] v. >•
^ix''.; (& here 'Eovpet, = n« = nxi = nx\ hence read nv, so Ki.
28o I CHRONICLES
Kom., BH. — 4. "jn't^] v. 's Sn-itj?, 0^ here 'Afapo^^X. Either spelling
may be original, but since Snvj; as a common Levitical name might
easily take the place of the less usual ^N"i;>, the latter may be
preferred with (&, although the writer may have used both forms, see
on 2 Ch. 26'. — ?Nnr] v. 2" >s:^^s^ <B IfOv^aijX, cf. 23'6. — nirn-] (g
'Upefiibe, V. 22 niD-);, ^ 'EpeLfxdbd. — nnN^Ss] v." ■"i-^'^n. — Kau. {ZAW.
1886, p. 260) departed from Ew. and others in the renditions of the
last nine names (v. s.) by reading second person instead of first, re-
pointing the text as follows : 2V^ -\T>'. ncc^i nSn.3 dpk ••'^n >j3n n^ 'jsn
'1JI rn'70 nc'il. Furthermore, he held that if the Massoretic point-
ing be accepted for ^"••<t, etc., it was necessary to suppose that the por-
tion of the verse from v'^ij on was taken from a context different
from that of the first five words. Oe. rightly pointed out that this
change from first to second person in three verbs is very doubtful. He
rendered ihe last two lines, Ich preise iind erhehe Hilfe, int Ungliick
sitzend rede ich iiberaus viele Gesichte or im Ungliick sitzend verwelke ich
er gab reichlich Gesichte. The text of Kau., followed recently by Bn.
and Ki., and the rendering of Oe. are alike difficult, since t ' gives poor
sense as the object of the two preceding verbs. From Ps. 34' we should
expect "God " as the object. Such is the case, if the relative is under-
stood before \i'?ii. (The omission of the relative is not unknown in
poetry and is common in the Chronicler's writings, see 1. 120.) Hence
it is neither necessary to change the pointings of the verbs nor to suppose
different contexts. Accordingly the first part of the verse is better
rendered Be gracious unto me, Oh Jah, be gracious tmto me. Thou
art my God, whom I magnify and exalt. In what follows, instead of
nrp 3::"i it;' read ■"i-j'nvr inr;. The verb of the last line may also be
rendered as an imperative, like "Jjn at the beginning of the verse. In
that case read i^m instead of i\7in. The full text is as follows:
■ ■■ T T - " T
With r\-z'p + 2 + f comp. D''Cio + n -1- 3 -f tt> in 27". Ti^r] may be
also connected with the fourth line 'ni nSs thus balancing the second,
and taken as a Pi. inf. abs. from nSs (= n'^c), Ges. § 75", and the
couplet rendered Thou art my help when in trouble, Fulfilling
abundantly visions. — 5. Instead of '1 pf^ read uip with Ki. — 6. r"'3']
for ."'•'33. — 8. .-icy^] is apparently the cstr. before a sentence (Be., Ke.,
et al., cf. BDB. ns;- d). — ^^D'?n f] an Aramaic word.
9-31. The singers according to their courses. — The order of
succession was determined as follows : the sons of Asaph received
XXV. 1-31.] COURSES OF THE SINGERS 281
courses numbered i, 3, 5, 7; the sons of Jeduthun 2, 4, 8, 10, 12,
14; the sons of Heman 6, 9, 11, 13, 15-24. From this Bertheau
judged that two Hsts of seven were first arranged, the one includ-
ing the sons of Asaph (v. ^) and the second, third, and fourth
of the sons of Heman (v. *), and the other the six sons of Jedu-
thun (v. =) and the first of the sons of Heman (v. "); then from
each list lots were drawn alternately. The last ten sons of He-
man finally drew for the remaining positions 15-24. Since three
separate urns could not have been used, Keil proposed that
all must have been placed in one urn. But this does not ex-
plain why the sons of Asaph received courses with odd numbers
and of Jeduthun with even. If two such lists were formed (Be.),
they could have been composed of twelve names each as well
as seven, since it is no more difficult to see why all the last
places should have fallen to the Hemanites, than to believe that
the lot would fall to the four sons of Asaph before taking one of
the three sons of Heman included in the first series. No doubt
we have here not a record of an actual lot but a simple rearrange-
ment of the names in vv. 2-4 by the Chronicler himself. His
scheme is apparent. He began with a son of Asaph and then
alternated with the sons of Jeduthun, taking the sons of both
families in the order given in vv. ^ '-, with the single exception that
Zacciir and Joseph (v. 2) were transposed. For the sixth place, he
skipped the family of Jeduthun and took the first son of Heman
instead. After exhausting the list of Asaph's sons, he took up
those of Heman in their stead, in the same order as v. ■•, alternating
these with the remaining sons of Jeduthun. With the fourteenth
course he had also exhausted the list of Jeduthun's sons, to which he
naturally added the next succeeding name from his list of Heman 's
sons. The last nine names of Heman 's sons remained and these
he divided into two groups, putting the first five in one list, and
the last four in another. Within these lists the names are again
taken in the same order as in v. ". The whole arrangement is
manifestly artificial. No break in the scheme justifies the con-
clusion that a part of this list was added later, as Kittel sup-
poses. The division into twenty-four courses of twelve each
would certainly be natural from the Chronicler.
282 I CHRONICLES
9. (6 adds vlQp avrov Kal dSe\(f>C)v airov before nONS. The number
288 (v. 0 and the analogy of the following verses demand that vnNi VJ3
-I!-.;; o^jtt' should be added after iDrS (Oe., Bn., Ki.)- There seems to
be some confusion also in the last part of the verse. — IDnS]. According
to Bn., this is a dittography from idpS. Ki. strikes it out as a gloss.
(6 certainly read it.— On nx^ (v. »'), ^'^^<"Hf'' (v. '^), '^'NI'V (v. '»), ''K^w
(v. 2"), niDT' (v. 22), 7\n-<hii (v."), cf. vv. 2-4 textual notes.
XXVI. The gate-keepers and other Levitical officers.—
Chapter 26 concludes the account of David's organisation of the
Levites. The genealogical connections of the gate-keepers are de-
scribed in vv. '■", and their appointments in vv. '2-". In the former
division are twenty-four heads of houses distributed among three
families. The appointments (vv. '2-19) were distributed to the fami-
lies according to the points of the compass, so it became necessary
to divide one of these families in order to make four divisions —
Zechariah, the first-born of Meshelemiah (Shelemiah), receiving a
special commission (v. ''). The administrators of the treasuries
(^•v. 20-28) follow the gate-keepers naturally. Similarly the keepers
of the treasuries follow the account of the gate-keepers in 91 ' ^-j
where the former are also classed as gate-keepers (9-6). The
chapter closes with an account of the Levitical officers for the
outward business of Israel (vv. 29-32).
1-11. The genealogies of the gate-keepers. — 1. Of the
Korahites]. Korah was the name of an Edomite (Gn. 366- •« 's),
of a son, i.e., a descendant, of Hebron (2"), and of the head of a
Levite family (Ex. 621- 24 Nu. 16' «■). The genealogy of Heman,
the singer, is traced through Korah to Kehath (6'««- <" « >); the
"sons of Korah" are mentioned in the titles of a number of psalms
(42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 84, 85, 87, 88); and "the sons of the
Korahites" appear as singers in 2 Ch. 20''. Here Meshelemiah, a
member of the fourth generation after Korah (cf. 9"), is the head of
a family of gate-keepers. Benzinger (Kom. p. 74) argues from these
data that the tribe of Korah rose from a non-Levitical, even non-
Israelitish origin, to become gate-keepers and later singers, but
identity of name is hardly sufficient support for this connection of
families which may have acquired the same name quite inde-
pendently. The Chronicler certainly knew the Korahites as sing-
XXVI. 1-19.] COURSES OF THE GATE-KEEPERS 283
ers (2 Ch. 20") as well as gate-keepers. According to 6" «■ <" « '
the singers of the family of Heman claimed Levitical descent
through Korah and Kehath, but other branches of this line of de-
scent must have been employed in other service, and so a family of
gate-keepers may have traced their descent from Levi through
Kore, Abiasaph, Korah. The general effort of the late classes of
Temple servants to show Levitical descent {cf. Ezr. 2^"^) doubtless
resulted ofttimes in conflicting claims, and at any rate the oldest
patriarchs of the tribe would likely be appropriated by widely differ-
ent families. Hence these genealogical connections are of little or no
value for determining the true standing and relationship of the late
families. — Meshelemiah\ Cf. 9^'. — Kore], Cf. 9''. — Ebiasaph*]
(v. i.). — 2. 3. Zechariah] of the sons of Meshelemiah, is men-
tioned again in v. '%and occurs also in g''\cf. also 24". — Jedta'el] is
also the name of a Zebulunite 7«- ">• " (q. v.), and of one of David's
heroes ii^^, cf. 12=' ^^"^ f. — Zebadiah] a frequent name but only in
the writings of the Chronicler. — Jathni'el |]. — 'Elani] besides the
name of the country east of Assy., a frequent post-exilic name,
but only in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne., cf 8^K — Jehohanan] a frequent name,
especially with the Chronicler. — Elieho'enai] also the name of a re-
turning exile Ezr. 8^ f. — 4. 5. The Chronicler identified 'Obed-edom
with the Gittite by the same name (13'^ '=2 S. 6'" *•), as is indi-
cated by the clause for God blessed him (Bn.). Obed-edom is
known elsewhere as a gate-keeper (15'*- ^^ 16^8), and by a later
glossator is classed as a singer (152' id^ q. v.). In the present
context Obed-edom may be taken as belonging, through Korah, to
the family of Kehath, since the Merarites are not taken up until
v. 1", and V. " limits the gate-keepers to these two families (Be.,
Ke., Zoe., Oe.). Since he is also called a son of Jeduthun (16'*)
Kittel places him in the family of Merari, but that phrase is prob-
ably a gloss (v. in loco). — None of these eight sons of Obed-edom
are otherwise known to us. The names Shemaiah, Jehozabad,
Jo'ah, and Nethan'el occur very frequently in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. as
the names of priests and Levites and are more or less common else-
where. 'Ammi'el is also an east-Jordanic name 2 S. 9^^ 17", a
Danite Nu. 13 '^ (P), and the name of David's father-in-law i Ch.
3' |. Sacar only occurs elsewhere as the father of one of David's
284 I CHRONICLES
heroes 11", while Issachar is only found as the name of the son of
Jacob and the tribe bearing his name. The name Pe'ullethai is
otherwise unknown. — 7. The sons of Shenmiah: 'Othni f, atid
Repha'el f, and 'Obed, and* Elzabad, and* his brethren mighty
men of valor (lit. sons of strength) Elihu, atid Semachiah -j-]. These
six men are otherwise unknown. The name 'Obed is found only
in Ru. 4"- ='■ " and hi Ch., and Elzabad is the name of a Gadite m
i2'2 -f-. Elihii is not an uncommon name. With Sema^rhiah may
be compared the Levitical name Ismuchiah 2 Ch. 3i'3 -j-. — Verse
9 belongs logically after v. ', but it is doubtless in its original place.
The Chronicler evidently overlooked this statement and so added
it later. — 10. Hosah] appears also in \t. i>- '^ and in i6'8, where he
is also associated with 'Obed-edofn as a gate-keeper f. — Shimri] is
the name of another Levite 2 Ch. 29^', also of a Simeonite 4", and
of the father of a hero of David ii^^ |. — For there was not a first-
born]. ^ adds the statement that the first-bom had died, which is
doubtless an inference from the present reading. Possibly the
article has fallen out before first-born ("nSid") nTl), which
would permit the rendering for he was not the first-born. — 11.
Hilkiah] is a very common na«me. — Tebaliah -j-]. — Zechariah].
On name cf. v. ^ — Not one of these appears as a son of Hosah
elsewhere. — The total number of gate-keepers was ninety-three
(62 4- 18 + 13), cf. 9" 16^8. Since the Chronicler knows of four
thousand gate-keepers in David's time (23'), he probably intended
these ninety-three as the chief men.
1. 1D!<] in 9" 1p;3N, (gB here AjStd l,a(pdp. tiD.s was a Gershonite
(62< f) but fiDo.x was descended from Kehath through Korah {cf. 9"
6? t. (22 f.) Ex. 6i«- 18. 2i)j hence read either ip^pN or 1??'?^? (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Gin., Ba., Bn.), the latter being preferable. — imcStt'D] so
w. 2- 9; V. » in>D'?tt'; 921 n>!;'?tt'D; 9>7- " DiS::'. — 6. D^^s-ccn] elsewhere
only in Dn. ii'- ', where the sg. is used. Here abstr. for concr. do-
minions = rulers; possibly we should read a^Sccn. — 7. ^31>l] ul adds
cnx. & reads '''!»-*l?aiiikO . — vhn io-^n]. After other Mss. cited by
Kennicott, also C5, prefix i to both words (Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki., Bn.).
12-19. The appointments of the gate-keepers. — The Chron-
icler described the Temple as if it were already in existence. The
XXVI. 1-19.] COURSES OF THE GATE-KEEPERS 285
royal palace was attached to the south of the Temple area, hence
no watchers were necessary there. The Chronicler clearly had the
post-exilic Temple of Zerubbabel in mind, thus he was describing
conditions of his own time or idealising them. — 12. Even of the
chief meti] i.e., the ninety-three chiefs who are enumerated above.
— 13. The small like the great] not as well the small as the great
(EVs.), since the literal meaning of the phrase is the like of the
small is the like of the great. The house of Hosah with only
thirteen chief men (v. ") fared the same as the house of Obed-
edom with sixty-two (v. «). — 14. Shelemiah] the same as Meshel-
emiah v. •. — Zechariah] is mentioned above in v. ^ — Counselor
with prudence] is probably no more than an effort to explain
why the subordinate Zechariah should have been ranked equally
with the three chief houses of gate-keepers (vv. '-''). — 15. The
guarding of the southern gate and the store-house {cf. Ne. la^^)
fell to Obed-edom and his sons cf. w. *-\ The Chronicler prob-
ably thought of this store-house as identical with the treasury
building, hence his addition "with Obed-edom" in 2 Ch. 252^,
cp. with 2 K. 14'^— 16. The western side fell to the lot of Hosah,
cf. w. '° '•. Strike out to Shuppim (v. i.). — At the gate of the
chamber* (v. /.). — At the ascending highway], a street which led
up to the western side of the Temple from the Tyropeon Valley,
the principal approach from the lower city and from the Western
Hill. — 17. 18. The number of gate-keepers serving at one time
was as follows : six on the east, four on the north, eight on the
south — i.e., four for the gate and apparently two at each of two
doors of the store-house — and six on the west — i.e., four at the
highway and two at Parbar — a total of twenty-four. No relation
between this number twenty-four and the twenty-four courses of
priests (24' « ) and of singers (25' «•) is apparent, nor does there
seem to be any connection with the twenty-four heads of families
named in w. ^-^K The Chronicler's preference for the number
twelve, also twenty-four as a multiple of twelve, is a sufficient
explanation. — Parbar] a Persian word meaning possessing light,
was apparently a colonnade or some kind of structure on the
western side of the Temple area identical with the Parvarim (Rv.
the precincts) in 2 K. 231' (see Dr. art. Parbar, DB.).
286 I CHRONICLES
13. ijjtfi ipii''?]/or every gate, an idiom common in Ch. and late Heb.
(1. 124). — 14. in>DSi:'] cf. V. ' text. n. — innoii] should read ih^-idtSi
with Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Gin., et al., but the versions probably read our
text. <& Kal Zaxapla, viol Swdf- tQ MeXx^^i certainly had our text.
H Zacharia; is likely a correction also. 21 "i-Sd yyv suggests that
(SI MeXx^^i originated in an Aramaic gloss to Y}!V. — 16. D''0!r'?]
should be struck out. Hosah alone is in place (cf. v. '") and aiiJcS
clearly arose by dittography from the preceding D''£!Dn, Be., Ke.,
Zoe., ei al. — no^r] only here as a proper noun, and once as a common
noun Is. 6^^=felling (of trees). The usual meaning casting forth Ki.
questions, since this was the main gate toward the city. U renders
qucB ducit, i.e., •tr (cf. Ju. 5' Ct. i') + npS "the gate which goeth into
the ascending highway." (^bal have Tracrro^opiou, so also Origen's
text. TO ira.<TTo<t)opLov is used to translate hdb'S in 9^6 23^' 28'^ 2 Ch.
31" Je. 35^ Ez. 40" "■ ", hence (& must have read nju'S or Pji:"S. Ac-
cording to 2 K. 23" there was a chamber on this side of the Temple in
the D^nno = ijib (cf. v. '*). By itself 05 has no more weight than i^,
since either may represent a transposition of two letters of the original,
but the absence of the name elsewhere, the difficult meaning if taken as a
proper name, and the fact that a chamber (nDiyS) is spoken of as in the
onnfl (2 K. 23") favour the reading of 05, njt:''? or noirS. On cstr.
followed by 3 see Ges. § 130a. — 19. ■■n-ipn] ^b j-ead Kaad = nnp, but
1^ is probably original, cf. v. '.
20-28. Administrators of the treasuries of the sanctuary.
— Two classes of treasuries are differentiated, those of the house of
God, and those of the dedicated things (v. ="). The former were
under the hands of Gershonites (vv. ^i 2=) and the latter under
Kehathites(vv."-28). — 20. And the Levites, their brethren, etc. 1 (v.i.)
is a superscription to the following section. — Over the treasuries
of the house of God^ i.e., for the fine flour, wine, oil, etc., cf. 9", —
and over the treasuries of the dedicated things] cf. v. ^e. The same
two divisions seem to be made in 9^8 «■ (Bn.). — 21. 22. The
sons of La adan, the descendants of the Gershonites through
Laadan]. The second clause is in apposition with the first.
On Laadan cf 23'. — The heads of the fathers' (houses) of La adan
the Gershonite, JehPel and his brethren^ Zetham and Jo'el were
over, etc.] Cf. 23'. The sons of JehVeli is a gloss (1;. i.). Jehi'eli-\
is an incorrect reading. Jehi'el'^ is the same individual men-
tioned in 238 298. The name is common in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne., but
not found elsewhere. — His brethren*] read as plural (v. i.), is
XXVI. 20-32.1 TREASURERS AND CIVIL OFFICIALS 287
added to show the inferior position of Zetham and Joel, cf. 23'
298. — 23. Kehath rather than the four famihes which sprang
from him, should be expected here, since only Amramites are
mentioned as over the treasuries. Possibly the others are added
because special offices of the Izharites and Hebronites follow
(w. " ff )j but there is no further mention of the Uzzielites. — 24.
And^] omitted in translation. Render with v. ^s, of the Amramites
. . . was Shuba'el* (cf. 23"= . . . rider over the treasuries. — 25.
And his {ShubaeVs) brethren of Eli'ezer]. His brethren is used
because all are descended from two brothers, Gershom and
Eliezer, sons of Moses, cf. 231^ ^ (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.). Benzinger
prefers the reading of ($ his brother. — Eli'ezer] and Rehabiah].
Cf. 23 '5- 17. — Jesha'iah] and the three following individuals are
only known from this passage. On name cf. 253. — Joram] is a
common name. — Zichri] is also the name of an Asaphite g'^ (cf.
Ne. II"). The name occurs twelve times in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. of
eleven individuals, elsewhere only Ex. 6" (P). — Shelomoth]. Also
v. " and in v. ^s Shelomith. The spelling of the name fluctuates
between these two elsewhere and is doubtful. Two other Levites,
an Izharite 23 '^ 2422 22 ^^nd a Gershonite 23', bore this name, also
a son of Rehoboam 2 Ch. ii^'' and the head of a post-exilic family
Ezr. 81". — 26. Which David, the king . . . had dedicated]. Cf.
18" = 28. 8", 2 Ch. 5'. — 27. To repair the house]. Apparently the
Chronicler thought David also provided for future needs. — 28.
Saul the son of Kish]. Cf. 8^3 = 939. — Abner the son ofN.er]. Saul's
cousin, cf. I S. 14^°- «', etc. — Jo^ab the son of Zeruiah]. Cf. 2i«.
The Chronicler presumes that every one who led forth the army
of the Israelites into battle consecrated of the booty to Yahweh.
20. n>nN]. Read an^ns with <$ dStXcpol clvtwv, so J. D. Mich., and
most commentators after him. — 21.22. The text is certainly corrupt
if these verses come from the Chronicler, since Zetham and Joel are here
sons of Jehieli, but in 23 ^ they are his brothers. (&^ adds to the con-
fusion and gives no aid. CU'-, which usually has the fullest reading,
here follows ^ in v. 21, but omits •''^N^m ^ja from v. 22 and inserts the
copulative before a.ir. (^^ may have been corrected from 23', but also
internal grounds point to ^"^x^n^ ■•ja as a gloss. The gentilic form is out
of place in v. 21, also in v. ", where it is simply repeated, and rn>x pointed
as singular, as in M, is useless, but as plural contradicts i'?N''n> ^j:i.
288 I CHRONICLES
The final ' of •''^N^ni (v. 21) is a remnant of the lost 1 before ant. — 25.
rnsi] (8 Kul T({i aSeXtpii) airov = vnx'?T adopted by Bn. — ni':'?^'] Qr.
n^nSi:', v. =» n^chr, (& ZaXunud in both (cf. 23" text. n.). — 26. ntt-S]
Ke. corrects to "iitn with B, so also Oe., Ki., but cf. 28^' text. n. — ■nts'i
niNDHi o^'D^nh]. Co-ordinate genitives depending on the same nometi
regens are unusual, Ges. § 128a. — 27. ptn'^] is used elsewhere to
repair &n old building 2 K. i2«- '• '^ 22* 2 Ch. 245- 12^ etc., cf. BDB.
prn Pi. 1. c. Here it must have the same or a more general sense,
V. s. — ^28. t'npnn] on art. for the rel. pron. see Ges. § 138^, also
1. 119. — C'^'lpon] Bn. corrects to B''Ji';'sn. — niDSc] cf. v. " text. n.
29-32. Officers for the outward business. — 29. Chenaniah]
appears elsewhere as the name of a master of the carrying (15"- "
q. v.). — For the outward business over Israel]. Cf. "Levites who
had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God"
(Ne. 1 1 '6). — Officers] i.e., some minor officials, possibly scribes
(cf. (g ypafji/xaT€V6Lv). As early as Deuteronomy (17^ ^- 19"
2V) priests and Levites are assigned duties as judges. In later
times the priests and Levites seem to have exercised a certain
amount of authority in outward things throughout the land (cf.
I Mac. 2", Jos. Ant. iv. 8. 14), which was probably the case in the
time of the Chronicler, who ascribed to David the inauguration
of the customs of his own time. — 30-32. One thousand and seven
himdred Hebronites were appointed to have oversight over the
business (nSX?^) of Yahweh and for the service (niDJ?) of the King
in western Palestine (v. ^o). Their work seems to have been the
same as that which their brethren performed in eastern Palestine,
i.e., for every affair ("131) of God, and [every] affair (131) of the
King (v. '2). Just how this service was related to that of the sons of
Chenaniah, the officers and judges (v. ^^), is not clear, nor can their
duties be determined with certainty. If we suppose them to have
been collectors of taxes, both for the Temple and for the King,
the account follows naturally the appointment of the treasurers
(vv. 2 "-28). That there should be only one thousand seven hundred
overseers for western Palestine with ten and one-half tribes, when
there were two thousand seven hundred for the two and one-half
tribes of Eastern Palestine, seems strange. Possibly these numbers
contain a hint of the importance of the district of Gilead in the
XXVn. 1-15.] COMMANDERS OF THE ARMY 289
Chronicler's own time. Judas Maccabeus found many Jews in
Gilead (i Mac. 5^^). — Jazer] (cf. 6« <8") also seems to have been
an important trans-Jordanic Jewish centre (i Mac. 5' '•). —
Hashabiah] is not found elsewhere as a Hebronite. On name
cf. 25'. — Jerijah]. Cf. 23" 24".
30 . naiya pi"''? layn] means literally from beyond Jordan westward.
Western Palestine is meant, cf. Jos. 5' 22'.
XXVII. The organisation of the army and the officers of
David. — The preceding chapter closes with an account of the
Levites who were assigned semi-secular duties. The organisation
cf the army (vv. '-'5), the list of tribal princes (vv. '^ -'''), the royal
treasurers and overseers (vv. ^^-^i), and the King's counsellors
(vv. "-") naturally follow.
Although the Chronicler has given the list of David's mighty men in
cc. 11/., such a doublet does not necessarily point to different authors
(cf. Bn. Kom. p. 79, Ki. Kom. p. 99). While the Temple is the centre
of interest in cc. 21 jf., it is also apparent that the writer wishes to
magnify David in every possible way. Solomon built the Temple but
David here receives the greater credit, since he collected the material,
money, and skilled workmen (c. 22). He, too, prepared for the service
in the Temple by organising Levites, priests, singers, and gate-keepers (cc.
23 jf.). According to 2 S. 238 ^- (i Ch. 11^" ^ ) David had many mighty
men, but they were not organised. The Chronicler would scarcely
attribute the preparation of the plans of the Temple (c. 28) and the
organisation of the personnel of the cult (cc. 23 /.) to David because
" Solomon. . . is young and tender " (22* 29'), and then overlook the
military and official bodies. David was pre-eminently a military leader
and Solomon a man of peace. Hence the Chronicler represents that
David had a large body-guard organised into twelve courses of 24,000
each. This account forms an essential part also of the history of David's
preparation for the Temple. A well-organised army and trained offi-
cials would aid materially in the successful completion of this great
undertaking. The Chronicler does not ignore this fact, for according
to his account, David appeals to these classes for aid (22" 282"' 29^ ^ ),
and depends upon them to furnish the necessary political support
(281 «•). Rather than being a later bungling piece of work inserted in
an unsuitable place (Bn.), c. 27 seems to fit into the scheme of the
Chronicler perfectly. The number 24,000 also suggests the Chronicler
{cf. 24' s. 259 3 ), and a body-guard of 288,000 men is about the kind
of an exaggeration (cf. 2 S. 15'*) to expect from the writer of 22'*.
19
290 I CHRONICLES
1-15. The organisation of the army. — Solomon organised a
force of officers, one for each month, to provide victuals for the
King and his household (i K. 4' «•). For this account the Chron-
icler substituted a large body-guard who served the King "in every
matter by courses," but ascribed their organisation to David.
The names of the twelve officers are taken from ii'° «•. — 1. After
this superscription a fuller account might be expected, but the
catalogue which follows (vv. ^-'s) contains only the twelve classes,
the number belongmg to each, and the name of the command-
ing officer, hence Bertheau thought only a partial account was
here given. — 2. Ishbaal* (v. i.) the son of Zabdi'el] does not
contradict "the son of a Hachmonite" (11")) since the latter
is the name of a family (Oe.). He belonged 3, to the family of
Perez (cf. 2* - ) from whom David also was descended (2^- ' * ).
— 4. Eleazar the son of Dodai*] is restored from ii'" {v. i.). —
And his course (and) Mikloth the ruler, is obscure. A Mikloth
occurs in 8^2 9" -•, but there is no ground for connecting him with
the one mentioned here f. — 5. Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada].
Cf. ii^s" 18" 27% also v. ^\ — The priest] is considered a proba-
ble gloss by Oe., since Benaiah was a militar)' leader, and Bn.
strikes it out because Jehoiada' is nowhere else called a priest, nor
even a Levite. But a Jehoiada occurs as a military leader for
Aaron (12" '">) and Levites figure in a military capacity (12"
(26))._6. Cf ii"-" = 2 S. 2S"'-''K—'Ammizabad ■\].—7. Cf iV' =
2 S. 232<. — 'Asah'el] was slain by Abner in the early part of David's
reign (2 S. 218-"), to which the clause and Zebadiah his son after
him clearly refers. The name Zebadiah occurs only in the writings
of the Chronicler (nine times in all). — 8. Shamhuth the Zerahite*].
Cf II". — 9-15. The order of the names from v. » onward varies
slightly from that in 11" «■. Helez and 'Ira^ (11" '■) are trans-
posed, as are also Abi'ezer and Sibbecai (11=^ '■). 'Ilai (11") is
omitted, so also Ithai (11") between Heled and Benaiah {iV° ' ),
the last two also being transposed. — Sibbecai, the Hushathite]. Cf
20*. Abi'ezer] was a citizen of 'Anathoth, a Benjamite town (cf.
6" <«»>). — Maharai] of the family of Zerah (cf. 2*). Cf 11 2°. —
'Othni'el] by his relation to Caleb (Jos. 15" Ju. i'^*-'* 3') was
incorporated into the tribe of Judah.
XXVn. 16-24.] THE TRIBAL PRINCES 29 1
1. mx'iniD'fl'^Nnn'^'] c/. 26^* text. n. — PKX>ni nxnn] used of enter-
ing and leaving service, 2 Ch. 23*- * 2 K. ii^- '• '. — nnxn] each, cf.
Ju. S'8 Nu. 17I8.— 2. Dvau"] so also 11", but 2 S. 238 natto 2Z'\ (&
here So/3a\ (= Sya-i-^), 11" 'leo-eiSaSa (= Ie(re/3aaX = Sj'Ji:"), 2 S.
238 'le^oade, hence We., e/ a/., are doubtless right in reading .-^oa'i
as original in 2 S. and ^•J2y> for both passages in Ch. — 4. nn] ii'^
nn 12 it>'Sn (but read there with 05 AwSai, "'in), so also 2 S. 23^
hence supply p -ir>-'?N, Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki., Bn.— niSpni inp'^nDi]
Be., on the basis of the addition to v. ^, struck out the copulative,
1, before ni'^pn (also Ke., Zoe.). Oe. suggested that this clause,
which is wanting in (S, arose through dittography. Kittel corrects v. '
to ipp^nD bp according to (S, Kal iirl, and reads the same here. — 8.
n-\vn nincj'] (6^ SaXaci^ 6 'Ecrpae, * Sa^iiaw^ 0 lefpaeX, !■ lefpa. 11"
nnnn n\::u', ^^ Za/j-adid 6 'Adi, 2 S. 23^^ •'-nnn noi;'. Oe. corrects to
TnT^n, so also Ki. The form n-\v is found only here, cf. ^mt vv. »■ ".
— 10. •'ji'^D.-i] (g 6 ^/c ^aWovs. 2 S. 2326 ■•tD'^'Dn. — 12. ^^d'^a?^] Qr. I?'?
,j,n,. — 15. n_';'n] (g XoXSeta, ii'd I'l^n (g X^aoS, 2 S. 2325 2'^n.
16-24. The tribal princes. — The two verses concerning the
census (v\'. "• ^4) indicate the probable purpose of this section,
viz., to show that David followed the legal method in making an
enumeration of the people (c. 21). When, according to P, Yahweh
commanded Moses to take the sum of the people in the Wilder-
ness of Sinai (Nu. i' '■), Aaron and a prince from each of the
twelve tribes (Nu. i"=) were associated with him in the work and
only the males from twenty years old and upward were counted
(Nu. I" " ). David likewise here had twelve princes of tribes
besides Zadok, the representative of the house of Aaron (v."),
and only those from twenty years old and upward (v. 23) were
numbered. No previous order is followed in this catalogue
of the tribes (cf. 2' '■ Gn. 35" «■ 46^ «■ 493 f). Gad and Asher
are wanting. The six sons of Leah come first, in the order of
their birth (cf. Gn. 29"-35 ^on-20 and 35"), then follow six tribes
(or divisions of tribes) of whom Rachel was the legal mother,
Bilhah's son Naphtali (cf. Gn. 30' 35"), the grandsons and son of
Rachel (cf. Gn. 3022-24 462° 35'"-") and Bilhah's remaining son
Dan (cf. Gn. 30«). Gad and Asher have neither fallen from the
text (Zoe.) nor is it likely that they have been omitted accidentally
(Ba.). The number twelve was full without them, and coming last
in several lists (22 Gn. 352^) they were the ones to be omitted. It
292 I CHRONICLES
is significant that we have six princes from Leah and six from
Rachel, if Zadok, the priest, who represented the whole people
rather than a part of a tribe {cf. 29"), is excluded. Of the twenty-
five individuals whose names appear in this list of the princes only
five are otherwise known. Zadok, David and his brother Eli'ab*
and Abner the cousin of Saul, cf. 26^8, are well known. HashaUah
is possibly identical with the person mentioned in 26^\ Most of
the other twenty names are common. — 16. El-iezer the son of
Zichri]. Cf. 23'^ and 26'K—Shephatiah]. Cf. i2\—Maacah]
as masc. personal name 11" Gn. 22" (J) i K. 2^^ f. — 17. Hasha-
biah]. Cf. 253. — Kenm'el] is the name of a son of Nahor Gn. 22"
and of an Ephraimite Nu. 34^^ f. — For Aaron, Zadok] is expected
rather at the beginning of the list (cf. Nu. i=), but is also in place
after Levi, — 18. 'Omri] is also a Zebulunite name 78 (q. v.), and a
Judean g\—Micha'el]. Cf. 5'^— 19. Ishmaiah]. Cf. 12* f.—
Jerimoth]. Cf. 2SK—Ezri'el*]. Cf. 5=^ Je. 36=^ f.— 20. 'Aza-
ziah] as a Levite name 15=' 2 Ch. 2)'^'' ■\.—Hoshea'\ Jo'el], and
Pedaiah] are frequent. — 21. Gile'ad]. Cf. 5'. The term might
designate all eastern Palestine. (See GAS. HGHL. pp. 548/.)
—Iddo]. Cf. Ezr. lo^^ (Kt.) ^ .—Zechariah]. Cf 24"-^— J a asi' el].
Cf. !!*■' f.— 22. 'Azar'el]. Cf. 2S*.—Jeroham] is frequent.— 23.
Because Yahweh had said, etc.]. David refrained from counting
all, since such an act would imply a doubt of God's promise in
Gn. 22".— 24. But finished not]. Cf. 218 '-.—Neither was the number
put in the book* of the acts of days of king David] because natu-
rally to the Chronicler no record would be made in the royal
annals of such an impious and disastrous census.
18. ih^Sn] Qr. Nin^Sx. Read with (g 'E\ta/3 = 3N"^n, which is
the name of David's eldest brother elsewhere, 2'' 2 Ch. ii's j S. i6«
1713. 28. 28^ cf. 2"-'-, so Zoe., Gin., Ki.— 19. "-N'-!;;:] as in 5=^ Je. t,6^\ but
the Hebrew pronunciation should be '^N''"i.:3.', so <g in every instance,
adopted by Ki. — 22. oni'] ^ba Icopa^, l lepoa/j.. — 24. -ied:;^ -\2D::n]
® iv /3i/3\(<f), cf. s^C'H n3T iflD in 2 K. i22» 138. 12 1413. is. 28^ etc. The
second isD-: probably arose through the influence of the first, hence
read icD2 with Ki.
25-31. The officers over the King's possessions. — Twelve
officers are here enumerated, another instance of the Chronicler's
XXVn. 25-34.] OVERSEERS AND COUNSELLORS 293
preference for this number. — 25. And over the king's treasures]
i.e., those in Jerusalem in contrast to those in the field, etc. —
^Azmaveth] also the name of one of David's heroes (11" 2 S. 23"), of
the father of two of David's mighty men (12^), and a Benjaminite
name (8'^ = 9") f-— 26. 'Ezri ^].—Cheliib]. Cf. 4" f.— 27. Shimei
the Ramathite]. Whether he was from the Ramah in Benjamin
(Jos. 18**) (Be., Ke., Zoe.) or Ramah (Ramoth) of the Negeb (Jos.
19' I S. 30") cannot be determined. On name cf. 25'. — For the
stores of the wine]. Cf. 2 Ch. iVK—Zabdi {cf. Jos. 7>- "• " 8"
Ne. II" (?) t) the Shiphmite] may have been an inhabitant of
Shepham (Nu. 34>'' '•) (Be., SS. who vocahse ''QSt?') or of Siph-
moth in the Negeb of Judah (i S. 30") (Ke., Ri. HWB., Ba.,
Bn.), with site unknown. — 28. The sycomore-trees] were pro-
verbial for their abundance in the Shephelah, cf. 1 K. 10" = 2 Ch.
1 15 = g27_ The Shephelah properly means lowland. George Adam
Smith (HGHL. pp. 201 ff.) would limit the technical designation
to the low hills west and south-west from the hill-country of Judah,
but Buhl {GAP. p. 104, n. 164) has shown that several passages
(Dt. I' Jos. 9' 2 Ch. 26'") favour the broader significance given in
the usual rendering of (g plain {to irehiov or 77 'TTehivri). (See also
EBi. IV. col. 4455 and Dr. in DB. III. pp. 893 /.) — Ba'al-hanan
the Gederite] from Gederah or Gedor, cf. 12^ Baal-hanan was
also the name of a king of Edom i^'- '» Gn. 7,6^^- '' f. — Stores
of oil]. Cf 2 Ch. III'. — Joash] also a Zebulunite 7^ {q. v.) f.
— 29. Sharon] the name of the coast-plain from Joppa north-
ward to Carmel, noted for its fertility. — Shitrai f]. — Shaphal]
also name of a grandson of Zerubbabel 3", a Gaddite chief 5'%
. a prince of Simeon Nu. I3^ and the father of Elisha i K. i9'«- "
2 K. 3" 6^' f. — 'Adlai |]. — 30. Ohil] a form of the Arabic word
abil (XjT) "We to manage camels. — The Ishma elite]. That an
Ishmaelite and also a Hagrite (v. ^i Heb.) appear in this list does
not indicate an earlier source for the names as Benzinger sup-
poses. The name Obil, which occurs only here, with its ap-
propriate meaning points rather to an artificial origin. — Jehdeiah].
Cf. 2420 -j-. — Meronothite]. Meronoth {(^^ Mepadcov) seems to
have been near Gibeon and Mizpah, cf Ne. 3'. — 31. Jaziz f, the
Hagrite]. C/. S'"'" Ps. 83' ">.
294 I CHRONICLES
27. D'cnpai:'] = o^pna + -n + 3 + -t. On -r for icn see Ges. § 36.
— 29. nai:']Qr. •'tpic, (^ ■' 'Ao-aprais, al Zarpai, so also IS, g- ■ " ^j *■■
and so ®. Kt. preferable, BDB. — 31. c'l^in] 1. 107.
32-34. The King's counsellors.— This catalogue has Jo'ah, the
captain of the host, and Abiathar, in common with previous similar
lists, also Jehoiada the son of Benaiah instead of Benaiah the son of
Jehoiada {v. i.), cf. 18'^-" = 2 S. S'^-is and 2 S. 20"-26. — 32. David's
lover]. EVs. render 7mde, which is a common meaning of the
Hebrew word (IH), but no uncle of David by the name of
Jonathan is knowTi elsewhere, while Jonathan, a son of Shimea
(Shimei), David's brother, is mentioned in 20^ = 2 S. 21=', hence
Be., Zoe., Oe., Ba., Bn. take the word (Til) in the general sense
of kinsman, here nephew. Zoe. cites Je. 32'' as parallel, but there
son (p) has certainly fallen from the text {cf. w. s- «, other Heb.
Mss., and (&). The uncles of David are nowhere given; Jonathan
is one of the most common Hebrew names; (^, H, certainly took
the common meaning uncle. A nephew would not likely be
chosen as a counsellor, nor is there any reason why either tradition
or the Chronicler arbitrarily should make this nephew David's
leading counsellor. On the other hand, the only Jonathan who
was an adviser of David was the son of Saul {cf. i S. 19. 20). The
Chronicler certainly selected Ahithophel and Hnshai from parts
of 2 S. {v. i.), which he did not quote, so he may also have wished
to refer briefly here to the romantic story of David and Jonathan.
The word in is used most often as loved one {lover), Ct. i" +
30 times in Ct., also in Is. 51, where it is equivalent to friend (BDB).
Lover is not too strong a word to describe the friend of i S.
igi- 3 2o<i f- 2 S. i-«. A man of skill, a fair rendering of the next
clause {]'^2'0 w'"'N) {cf. 2 Ch. 26* 34'0. is certainly an apt descrip-
tion of Jonathan, the son of Saul {cf. 2 S. i-- "). And he was
scribe (Sin "121D1) could not describe him, but the form suggests
that these words are a gloss, which is made more probable by their
absence from (g^ and from Origen's Septuagint text (Field). A
glossator found a scribe mentioned in i8'« 2 S. S'^ and 2 S. 20", and
missing the office here, added this phrase to the first oflScer, ignor-
ing the fact that he was already described as a counsellor (ryT*).
Although Jonathan had long been dead (i S. 31 2), Ahithophel had
XXVm. 1-10.] DAVID'S ADDRESS ON THE TEMPLE 295
also been dead for some time (2 S. 17"), and the list does not purport
to give the officers living in David's old age. The proper place for
Jonathan is at the head of this catalogue, since he was David's
first counsellor. — Jehi'el, the son of a Hachmonite]. A son of a
Hachmonite is mentioned once elsewhere (n")- The word mean-
ing "wise" is particularly appropriate here, of the tutor of the
King's sons. — 33. Ahithophel] a most trusted counsellor of David,
whose word was as "the oracle of God" (2 S. 16"), joined himself
to Absalom during the revolt of the latter (2 S. is^')? then killed
himself when his counsel was not followed (2 S. 17"). — Hushai,
the Archite] befriended David during the same rebellion, cf. 2 S.
1532-" i6i«-i9 175-16. The "border of the Archites" was not far
from Beth-el Jos. 16^. — The king's friend]. Cf. 2 S. 15" i6'«
also I K. 45. "The friend" and "the well beloved friend" were
titles of honour in Egypt (see Erman, Ancient Egypt, p. 72). {Cf.
also I- Mac. 2'^ y^ 6'° tmv (f)i\(ov; io«= 11" 2 Mac. 8' tmv
7rpa)T(ov <f)L\(ov.) — 34. Jehoiada , the son of Benaiah] is elsewhere
"Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada" (see references above v. ').
Bertheau would simply transpose, but against this change are Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., et al. A priest is expected before Abiathar (cf. i8i« =
2 S. 20") and since Jehoiada is designated "the priest" in v. *
{v. s.) the text is probably correct as it stands. (On the same name
for grandfather and grandson, cf. 24'.) — Abiathar]. Cf. 24^ —
Jo''ah] David's sister's son, 2'8.
XXVIII-XXIX. David's last assembly and his death.—
David is represented as calling a general assembly to ratify the
choice of Solomon as his successor, but according to the historical
record in i K. i, Solomon owed his succession to the machinations
of his mother, Bath-sheba, and the prophet Nathan. According to
the Chronicler, Solomon was the appointee of God himself (28^ cf.
22' '•). The principal purpose of the assembly was to acquaint
the public with the project of building a temple and so secure the
popular support (28i-«), hence Solomon was publicly advised of his
responsibility (28'-'°); the plans were transferred to him (28"-'9);
he was given encouraging assurances of support (2820-21); and the
princes were called upon to aid the project by personal contribu-
tions (29'-»). As Solomon signalised the completion of the Temple
296 I CHRONICLES
by a prayer of dedication (i K. 8"-"), blessings (i K. S^^-s'), dedi-
catory sacrifices (i K. S^^-^"), and a sacred feast (i K. 8"), so
David, according to this account, marked the completion of his
preparations for the building of the Temple by a prayer (29'°-"),
blessings (292°), sacrifices (292'), and a sacred feast (29"'). The
history of David closes with the anointing of Solomon as King
(29^=2 1'), the account of his death and a summary of his reign
(2926-30),
XXVIII. 1-10. Solomon presented to the assembly as the
divinely chosen successor to the throne. — 1. Now David as-
sembled all the princes of Israel} a general term including all the
princes designated in the following list, i.e., the princes of the tribes]
mentioned by name in 27'«-", the princes of those who served the
king by courses] mentioned by name in 272-15^ the princes (or
captains) of thousands and the princes (or captains) of hundreds]
repeated from 27', the princes over all the property and the cattle of
the king] those mentioned by name in 27" -s'. — And his sons with
the eunuchs], J. H. Michaelis {recte Syr. regis et filiorum eius,
c. 2724- 31. Male Vulg. filiosque suos) and modems (Be., Ke., Zoe.,
Oe., Ki., EVs.) connect and his sons with the preceding — the pos-
sessions of the King belonging also to his sons — but the mention of
the King's sons is to be expected here and they are certainly in
place in such an assembly, cf. 1 K. i'- '»• " {v. i.). — 2. My
brethren]. The King was regarded as the brother of his subjects, cf.
Dt. I715- 20 also I S. 30=3 2 S. i9'3 "2). — As forme,etc.]. Cf. 22'. —
A house of rest for the ark] i.e., a permanent abode. It had been
carried about from place to place previous to this time. — The foot-
stool of our God] refers to the "mercy-seat" (H^lSD) {cf. v. ") upon
the ark {cf. Ex. 25") (Be., Ke., Oe., Bn.). — / had prepared] does not
refer to the preparations of 22* »■ ^ «•, since those were made to aid
Solomon (22^). The Chronicler here represents that David made
ready to build before God had commanded him not to do so (c. 17
= 2 S. 7). — 3. Cf. 228. — 4. 5. As Yahweh chose Judah from all the
tribes {cf. 5"), the house of Jesse from Judah {cf. i S. 16'), and
David from among all his brethren {cf. i S. i6«-'=) to be the reigning
prince {cf. ii* 177 = 2 S. 7^ i K. S'^), so he selected Solomon from
among the many sons of David to sit tipon the throne of the kingdom
XXVm. 1-10.] DAVID'S ADDRESS ON THE TEMPLE 297
of Yahweh (cf. 29=' i7'0- Solomon is thus clothed with divine
authority. — 6. 7. V.Ms repeated from 22'° (q. v.). With v. '" cf.
17", and with v. '^ cf. 1 K. 3'^ 8" 9^. — 8-10. David closes this
portion of his address with a personal admonition first to the
congregation of Israel (v. «) and then to his son Solomon (vv. ' '»).
With v. ^ cf. Dt. 4-' '■ " 30'' '• Lv. 2$*\ — With a perfect heart].
Cf. 29'- '8 I K. 8". — Yahweh hath chosen thee, etc.] v. s. vv. " «
The address is interrupted by the transfer of the plans of the
Temple to Solomon. David resumes his admonition to Solomon
in V. 20^ beginning as he leaves off here.
1. Snpii] elsewhere in Hiph. in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne., i Ch. 136 15' (both
from the Chronicler) 2 Ch. 52 (= i K. 8') ii' (= i K. 1221). 15' is
ascribed to an extra-canonical source by Biichler, Bn., Ki., but v. in
loco. — mpSncn] 1. 42. A very common word of the Chronicler. —
Dimu'DH] for royal officers is late (BDB. mtt' i b), cf. 27' 2 Ch. 17"
228 Est. ii° Pr. 29'^^. — ^'^■^-\'\ used elsewhere in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. as a general
term for movable possessions, 272' 2 Ch. 31' 32" Ezr. 8^1 io« all of which
are probably from the Chronicler, 1. 107. — a^Dnon / ii^y] wanting
in (&^^, (&^ Kal tCjv vlQv aiirov (riiv rots evvovxois, H filiosqiie suos
cum eunuchis. Bertheau stated the following reasons for taking rjaSi
with the preceding "^^hi (i) Sis the sign of the gen. before iVn
and would hardly be the sign of the ace. before the next word;
(2) if the sons of David had been intended, they would not be given
in this position. The first is no valid objection in the Chronicler's
writings. As regards the order, if we turn to c. 27, we shall ob-
serve that up to this point the Chronicler has included in this
verse all the officers to the end of v. ^i [v. s.). Jonathan, the next
in order (2732), had long been dead {v. s. 27^2), and following him
is the tutor of the King's sons (2722). It is a well-known fact that
eunuchs frequently had charge of the education of young princes
(see DB. I. pp. 793 /., art. Eunuch), hence the King's sons with the
eunuchs are not out of order here, as Be. contended, but e.xactly where
they should be expected. By construing rja'ji with the following, with
Jt, we also have a satisfactory explanation of D>, which is otherwise
peculiar in this list of accusatives. — 2. ijiynt:'] 1. 115. — Dnn f] occurs
only in poetry and late writings (BDB.). — ^nio^Dn] 1. 54. — 4. ^^Sc^'-] 05
Tov yev^adai. fie ^aaiX^a, H ut me eligeret regetn, hence Oe. thinks
CS, B, read '':3i'?DnS. — 5. hidSc] 1. 67. — 7. imrDn] 1. 54. — ipidSd] 1. 67.
— ntn dvd] especially Dt., Je., and subsequent writings (BDB. av
7 h). Used elsewhere in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. only in 2 Ch. 6'^ (=1 K. 8^*),
cf. also nrn avn^ only in Dt. 6^* Je. 44"; also Ezr. 9'- '^ Ne. 9'", which
are from the Chronicler (see Torrey, CHV. pp. 14 ff.). — 8. Israel is the
298 I CHRONICLES
mn' Snp also in Ne. 13', cf. Dt. 232- ' '• <• «• » La. i'" Mi. 2^ Nu. i6»
20<. — ar^njn |]. — 9. mrn:: -is' '^2\. Cf. 29'^ aaS matt-nD -ix'''? (from
the Chronicler) J; elsewhere in OT. Gn. 6' (J) nS naa-n^ ix^ Ss.
nx' is not found alone in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne., and mams only occurs in
these passages with this meaning, see BDB. nas'nD i a. — ijc'iip] 1. 23.
— in^ji'] in the Hiph. late (= earlier Qal), only three times in OT.
(Is. 19^ is from another root, see BDB.), 2 Ch. ii'^ 29". Ki. (Koiit.
p. 126) says the former could come from the Chronicler. Bn. ascribes
both to Midrashic sources, 1. 30. — lyS J] Driver gives among the
words or constructions of the Chronicler which are used elsewhere
only in poetry (LOT.^^, p. 539). — 10. na-yi prn]. The same phrase
occurs as the final admonition in a speech in Ezr. 10^, which is cer-
tainly from the Chronicler (see Tor. CHV. p. 21).
11-19. The transfer of the plans.— 11. The pattern (n'^J^n),
literally "construction," was probably a description in words of
the dimensions, material, etc., similar to what is found in Ex. 25"= *•,
and not a drawing. David delivered to Solomon the pattern of
the porch, cf. 2 Ch. y i K. 6'; and of the houses thereof (v. i.), i.e.,
the rooms of the Temple building, the hekdl or holy place, the
debtr or holy of holies, and the side-chambers (i K. 6= f); and of
the treasuries, probably the side-chambers; and of the upper
chambers, cf. 2 Ch. 3'; and of the inner chambers, the porch and
holy place according to Be., Ke., Zoe.; and of the house of the
mercy-seat, i.e., the holy of holies. — 12. David, as here repre-
sented, also worked out all the details for the courts and for the
surrounding buildings, and delivered to his son the pattern of
everything which he had in his mind (lit. spirit). This use of
spirit (ni"l) as the seat or organ of mental acts is late, cf. Ez. ii^
20=2 (BDB., m"l. 6). — For the treasuries of the house of God and
for the treasuries of the dedicated things] (cf. 26=") describes more
closely one use to which all the chaynbers round about were put.
■ — Verse 13. is ambiguous. And for the courses, etc., may be
taken as a continuation of for the courts and for all the cham-
bers (v. '2)^ ix., that David delivered also a description of the
courses of the priests, etc., to Solomon; or the verse may con-
tinue the description of the uses of all the chambers round about
(v. '=). Benzinger points out that the word pattern {r\'''11T\)
could hardly be used for a description of the courses, and
XXVm. 11-21.] PLANS OF TEMPLE GIVEN TO SOLOMON 299
(g {koI TOiv KaTaXv/xaTcov) certainly connected this verse with
V. '=". Bertheau (followed by Ke., Zoe., Oe.) held that all of
this verse is a further description of the uses of the chambers,
while V. "^ is a continuation of the things described by pattern,
hence he understood lie gave him the pattern before v. '^ — 14.
The Chronicler was probably influenced by the account of the
tabernacle in Ex. 25, where Yahweh gives Moses the pattern of
"the tabernacle" and the pattern of "all its vessels" (Ex. 259).
— For all vessels of every kind of service]. The pleonastic style is
characteristic of the Chronicler. — 15. And a weight for the golden
candlesticks and their lamps] i.e., David appointed (jr,"''l) (v.'') a
certain weight for the candlesticks (cf. 2 Ch. 4'). — Candlesticks
of silver] not mentioned elsewhere; thought of as used in the
priests' chambers (Ke., Oe.); in reality a mere fancy of the
Chronicler. The same applies to the tables of silver mentioned
in the following verse. — 16. Elsewhere only one table of show-
bread is mentioned (cf. Ex. 25" «■ 37'° 40" i K. 7^^ 2 Ch. 13"
291 8), except 2 Ch. 4", q. v. — 17. As in the foregoing verses, he
gave the pattern must be understood. — The flesh-hooks (i.e., forks
for lifting meat) are mentioned elsewhere only in Ex. 27' 38^ Nu.
4>< 2 Ch. 4>S cf. also i S. 2'3- 1^.— The basins were used for sprinkling
the blood of the victim against the altar, cf. 2 Ch. 29", and the cups
were those with which the drink-offering was poured out, Ex. 25^'
37'8 Nu. 4' f. — The bowls were possibly a covered dish (Be.,
Ke., et al.); mentioned elsewhere only in Ezr. i'"- '° 8". — 18.
Altar of incense]. Cf. Ex. 3o'-"' 2 Ch. 26'«. — And the pattern
of the chariot, the cherubim]. The cherubim are thought of as
constituting God's chariot as in Ps. 18" <"». The Chronicler
probably had the vision of Ez. i^ "• >5 s- (cf. BS. 49*) in mind.—
19. All this in writing is from the hand of Yahweh upon me,
causing me to understand, even all the works of the pattern]. As
Moses received the pattern of the tabernacle and its vessels by
divine inspiration (Ex. 259- *" 27^), so the Chronicler, while giving
David the credit for preparing the plans for the Temple, declares
that Yahweh was the source of David's knowledge. "The hand
of Yahweh upon . . . " is a frequent expression for divine inspira-
tion (cf. 2 K. 3'5 Ez. I' 3'^ etc.).
300 I CHRONICLES
11. n^jari] a pallern according to which anything is constructed,
P and late (BDB.), cf. vv. '2. is. 19. — VP3 pni] (6 Kal twv o'ikuv avrov.
This, omitting pn, which is unreadable unless n^jan is supplied, is
the correct rendering, generally adopted, with the suflSx referring to
the Temple. Bn. corrects vna to non. — vjijj] also in restored text
of V. 2° t a loan-word from or through Persian (BDB.) 1. 19. —
nn] only here by the Chronicler in the sense of seat or organ of
mental acts. This use is occasional and late (BDB.). — 12. a^n':^Nn no]
1. 15. — 13b-14. (S'^A here and in the following verse abridged. — 15.
anr Dn>mji :i7\jn nnjcS Sp'^''^^]- Be. construed Vpu'D as ace. of the obj.
dependent upon pn of v. " (also Zoe., Oe.) and an: as in free subordina-
tion to on^mji (Zoe.). The text is obscure. — mnp] other MSS. mnva.
— 18. n-'jan'^i] S the sign of the ace, Be., Ke., et at. — a''33Di D-cnsS] Be.
corrected to DiJ3Dni d^w-idh with (S, H, but see Ke. — 19. iSjj nini nin a.ira
S'Dari] 7^•\r^^ must be the subject of SiD'^yn, as it is implied in the phrase
mn^ TIC (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.). 'Sy has been construed in three different
ways. Bertheau connected it with 2nD2 as in Ps. 40^ "'Sjj 31P3 "pre-
scribed to me," hence he rendered the passage das alles hat durch eine
mir zur Norm gegehene Schrift von Jahve's Hand Jahve gelehrt, and un-
derstood the law of Moses to be meant, since Ex. 25 jf. was the basis for
this passage. Keil connected "'':'>' with the preceding nini t^d " writing
from the hand of Jahve came upon me," i.e., a writing which was divinely
inspired, but not necessarily received immediately from Yahweh as in
the case of Moses (so also Zoe.). Oettli construed the words as Ke., but
since a writing composed by David could noi be said to teach him, he
corrected S'^sB'n to ^'?''?K'o'7. Benzinger takes "iSy with S-'Dcn, which is
not an impossible construction in Ch. — ana] 1. 60. — Sos-n]. The Hiph.
is so used by the Chronicler in 2 Ch. 30=2 and Ne. g"-", cf. also Ne. 8'- "
(see Tor. CHV. p. 24). — V. ''» is quoted by Dr. among "the heavy
combined sentences, such as would be avoided in the earlier language
by the use of two clauses connected by i^'n" {LOT.^^, p. 539).
20. 21. Encouraging assurances to Solomon.— 20. Be strong,
etc.], cf. V. 1° 22'='', for Yahweh lu-ill not fail thee nor forsake thee] a
Deuteronomic phrase, cf. Dt. 316- s Jos. i^ — All the work for the
service of the house of Yahweh] i.e., all the work of building the
house. — Now behold the pattern of the porch (of the Temple) and of
the houses thereof, and of the treasuries thereof, and of the upper
rooms thereof, and of the inner chambers thereof, and of the house of
the mercy-seat, even the pattern of the house of Yahweh^] restored
from (^, is doubtless original and dropped out by homoeoteleuton,
see Tor. ATC. p. 67, Ezra Studies, p. 73. — 21. And behold the
XXIX. 1-9.] THE OFFERINGS FOR THE TEMPLE 301
courses, etc.] described in cc. 23-26. The presence of the priests
and Levites, who are not mentioned in 28', is not imphed. —
Every willing man that hath skill]. This combination (D''12
nODrii), not found elsewhere, may have been suggested by
" whosoever is of a wiUing heart " (}2h 2'^12 b^) (Ex. 35^)
plus "every wise-hearted man" {2b D3n b^) (Ex. 35'°). The
idea that skilful men should offer their services for the building
of the sanctuary was certainly suggested to the Chronicler by Ex.
20. At the end of the verse restore from (B aSixn o'ljan ns njni
nini r^j n^j2ni nion r^^2^ D^n^'jan vnm vn^'Syi vdtjji vnai {v. s.). —
21 . 'ij SdS]. Be. struck out h but similar uses of h elsewhere by the
Chronicler are against this. Ke. thought it was used to emphasise the
following phrase. Dr. calls it the S of "introduction," LOT.^', p. 539,
No. 45 (1. 13c). As in 52 2626 29^, S is apparently used to introduce a
nominative similarly to a late use of na (see Ges. § 117 i) and probably
should be explained in the same way.
XXIX. 1-9. David's appeal for free-will offerings and the
response. — Here again the account of the Chronicler is modelled
after the history of the tabernacle (v. s. 2821). As Moses appealed
to the people for free-will offerings (Ex. 35^-^ cf. 251-8) and the
latter responded to that appeal (Ex. 35^"-"), so David is rep-
resented as appealing to the princes of Israel, and receiving
their gifts. — 1. Solomon whom alone God hath chosen], cf.
285, is yet young and tender] and therefore cannot carry out
his father's plans without assistance, cf. 22^. — The palace]
(ni''3n) a word used ordinarily for a Persian palace or for-
tress, cf. Ne. I' Est. !=■ 5 2=- 6. 8 ^15^ etc., Dn. 8^, also of
the fortified courts of the Temple, Ne. 2^, but here, in v.'' and
possibly in Ne. 7=, of the Temple itself, a term descriptive of its
grandeur. So used also in the Talmud (see Tor. CHV. p. 36;
1. 12). — 2. With all my might], Cf. "by my painful toil" 22'^
{q. v.). — David had prepared gold, silver, and bronze] the materials
which the people gave for the tabernacle (Ex. 35^ cf. 253), also
stones of onyx] (cnti^) a precious stone, possibly onyx or beryl,
but identifications are dub. and Vrss. vary; found in Havilah,
according to Gn. 2 '2. The phrase stones of onyx is also used
302 I CHRONICLES
combined with and stones for selling in Ex. 25' t,^^' "^ where
these stones are described as " for the ephod and for the breast-
plate," whence the Chronicler probably derived the phrase. —
Variegated stuff and fine linen^'\ to be used for the priestly
vestments {v. i.). — 3. / give unto the house of my God] not
necessarily his whole private fortune, according to the text, but
cf. V. ■•. The object of the verb follows in v. \ — Above all that
I have prepared] i.e., above all prepared in his official capacity,
cf. 22'«. — 4. David's gift would amount to over one hundred
millions of dollars of our money if weighed by the heavy
standard, or one-half that amount by the light standard. This
amount is a pure fiction, as the similar exaggeration in 22'^.
Solomon was the first to secure the gold of Ophir (2 Ch. 8'*
9'" = I K. 9" lo'i), but such an anachronism is not strange from
the Chronicler. — The King set aside his private gift to overlay
the walls of the hotises] i.e., the various rooms of the Temple
proper, cf 28", also 2 Ch. y-^, and also 5 to supply gold for the
things of gold and silver for the things of silver even for every
work by the hands of artificers, thus furnishing the precious
metals for the most sacred things. — To consecrate himself] lit.
" to fill his hand," is a phrase used regularly of induction into
a priestly office, cf. Ex. 28^' 32" 2 Ch. 13^ 29", but here figura-
tively, "who will offer willingly like one consecrating himself to
the priesthood?" — 6. The princes over the king's work] are
those recorded in 2725-31. — 7. Gold, five thousand talents] or about
one hundred and fifty millions of dollars, or one-half this amount
by light standard {cf. v. ^ and 22'^). — Ten thousand darics] slightly
less than fifty-six thousand dollars. The use of daric, a Persian
coin, is clearly an anachronism. Why this small amount in darics \
should have been added to the large amount in talents does not
appear. The older explanation was that the sum in darics rep-
resents the amount contributed in coin (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). — 8.
JehVel]. Cf. 26" '■. — 9. These gave with a perfect heart] i.e.,
without grudging, cf. 28 ^
1. 'x 12 in3 ins]. On the omission of the relative by the Chronicler
see 1. 120. Possibly nnN is a copyist error for icn. — n-\>2n] is used of
the Temple only here, v. 's, and Ne. 7', and of "the fortified court or
>
XXIX. 1-9.] THE OFFERINGS FOR THE TEMPLE 303
enclosure of the ;emple " Ne. 2^, all passages from the Chronicler {v. s.).
— 2. ■'331] other mss. S331. — '>mji3n] 1. 54. — ^id] in 2 K. 9^" Je. 45"
means stibium in the form of a black mineral powder used for
darkening the edges of the eyelids; in Is. 54" possibly a dark cement,
setting off precious stones, but We. and TKC. correct to •^bj. Here -\^s
is usually taken as a stone of dark colour. Ki. corrects to •\d': here also,
but this is doubtful. — S'>!r ij3N1 rt-\p'> px '731 nD|-ni] v^z' meaning marble,
occurs only here and as rr only Est. i« Ct. 5'*. Elsewhere rr is a
common word for " fine linen." HDpi is usually understood as a
variegated stone here, Be., Ke., et al., but the word is used no-
where else for a stone, and elsewhere means exclusively " variegated
woven stuff." In Ex. 2636 27I6 3535 36" 3S'8. 23 3929 the weaver of
"blue and purple and scarlet" is called a " variegator " (op.^).
Now, it is exactly this "blue and purple and scarlet" and also
fine linen (pz-) which we should expect here from Ex. 25' 35' after
which the Chronicler's account is modelled {v. s.). rwp'^ includes the
coloured material as the product of the "variegator" (sp^). These
materials were necessary for the Temple as well as for the taber-
nacle, since they were used for making priestly vestments (Ex. 28^-
39. 39 ^y3. 27. 28. 28j_ Hcncc it Is probable that r}-\p-^ \2H Sdi is a mar-
ginal gloss intended originally to explain the difficult •\^o, but which
crept into the text after nnpii instead of before it. This gloss caused
the addition of the following ij3ni, which (& probably did not read
{cf. (&^^ Kal irdpiov with (&^ Kal \l9ovs waplovs). Accordingly the
original read a'sri PiDpni. — diS] 1. 105. — 3. A strangely worded sentence,
see Dr. LOT.^\ p. 539.— n':'JD] a very late word (BDB.), cf. Ec.
2' t- — hSvd'?] I. 87. — \iij''3n] 1. 54. — 4. pprn] used in the Pu. of pre-
cious metals also in 28" (from the Chronicler), and in Ps. 12' <^'; and
of settled wines in Is. 25', 1. 32. — nvj {]. — 5. .13^'^?:] in sense of
workmanship only 22'^ 282' (both from the Chronicler) in Ch.-Ezr.-
Ne.; and elsewhere i K. 7'^ and a phrase of P Ex. 3i3- s 3529. 31 33 35_
— D-'B'nn] cf. '4' (= 2 S. 5") 22'6 2 Ch. 24'2 3411 (= 2 K. 22') Ezr.
3', also I Ch. 41* and Ne. ii^s. — aijnn] Hith. in the sense of offering
a free-will-offering (for the first Temple), also w. "■ »• ^- '^- "• "; (for
the second Temple) Ezr. i^ 2^^ 3^ (BDB.). These verses are certainly
from the Chronicler (1. 70). — 6. ni3Nn n'i''?] usually 'nh ^U'ni, cf. 27'
2 Ch. i^, but 'nh na* in Ezr. 829. On S cf. 2821 text. n. — 7. D\nSxn n>3]
1. 15. — 0"'j3nnN] (1. 22) so also in Ezr. 8^' f; 05 xP^<^0'^^, 13 solidos;
probably = Sapet/cos, cf. iddti Ezr. 2^^ Ne. 769- '» 'i -j-, which repre-
sents bpaxp-'fi, so Tor. CHV. pp. 17 /., on Ezr. 827. For other views
see DB. III. p. 421 b, and |D3"\i in BDB. with authorities there cited.
— 131] cf. Ezr. 26^ = Ne. 766 (xian) Ne. 7"- '» (ni3i) and Ezr. 2"
(niN3i) ; and elsewhere Ho. 8'^ Jon. 4" Ps. 6818 Dn. ii'2 f (1.
106). — 8. Nxcjn] = Nxnj -wa, cJ. v. ". — 9. oanjnn] 1. 70. — ■rhy^:^ nnniy]
304 I CHRONICLES
" a standing expression in the Chronicler's account of such occasions,"
Tor. CHV. p. 24, on Ne. 8'^
The source of 22'-'3 28i-'2- '^b- i' 291-9. Are these thirty-five and
one-half verses from an earlier source (so Biichler, Bn., Ki.), or a free
composition by the Chronicler? The following words or phrases
found elsewhere in Ch.-Ezr.-Ne. only in verses which may safely be
ascribed to the Chronicler occur here as follows (see textual notes for ref-
erences) : OMoh 22^, nnanoS 22', fi3-\ (as a general term for movable pos-
sessions) 28', nin ovr^3 28', niaii-na -x> Ss 28', v^tjj 28", mon 29', ppiD
29S hdnSd (meaning workmanship) 29^ atj (as Hiph. meaning offer-
ing a free-it'ill offering) 29^- '• '• ', D^jomx 29', m 29', a total of
twelve expressions recurring fifteen times in twelve out of the thirty-
five and one-half verses. Some of these words are rare, occurring in
only two or three places, but others, like umdi, are rather common
in this group of writings. In addition, nearly every late or unusual
expression found here is met with elsewhere in passages which are
certainly from the Chronicler's hand, and those occurring often
here he uses frequently elsewhere. These are as follows : d^h'tn-i nin^
22', -irj?ii (meaning appoint) 22', dih^nh n^z 22^ 28'^ 29', 2-h 22'- *■ ^- "
29^ pon 22'- 5- 5- '" 282- ' 29"- \ SnjnS (p with inf. to express necessity)
22^, nSycS 22^ 292, nixiN 22=, moSc 22"' 285- ', -|c>' nin> •>t\i 22", ^yz'
2212, Snpii 28', nip^nDH 28', DTna'cn (meaning royal officers) 28',
Israel the nini Snp 28^, uB-nnn 28', na'j?i prn 281", n>iZT\ 28", 3.-"3 28",
V'Styn 28'3, la's omitted 29', oicin 29^, nc>S (S introducing a nomi-
native) 29^, rh^^^i nn:;i:' 29', a total of twenty-four expressions recur-
ring forty times in twenty-six out of thirty-five and one-half verses,
certainly establishing a strong probability that this is a composition
by the Chronicler if there is any force at all in the philological argument.
Furthermore, many expressions show the Chronicler's point of view
distinctly, and it can be shown that the writer was dependent upon
material collected or composed by the Chronicler, indicating that our
passage is at least no older than the latter. — According to 22'' and 28^
a man prospers as he keeps the commandments of Yahweh. The
same thought is expressed by the Chronicler in 2 Ch. 24-" 26* 3121. —
28' includes almost all the ofl&cers mentioned in c. 27, suggesting that
t?ie latter, which is from the Chronicler, was before the writer. — With
nini pidSd ND3 Sj; 28^ cf. a'^iy -\y tidSdoi "ini23 inimnyni 17" (which
the Chronicler has rewritten from aSiy nj? in3'?cci ino jcnji 2 S. 7'^
thus representing Israelitish royalty as belonging to Yahweh). He
shows the same point of view in Da\'id's prayer nsScDn nin^ -[S 29",
cf. also nini ndd S>' 292'. — aisnpn nnxxSi a^nSs-n ro pi-ixnS 28'2, shows
acquaintance with 2620, which is from the Chronicler. — ■'junjn Sn^p'-
29' also suggests a knowledge of 26^' ' from the same hand.
The Chronicler's style is apparent throughout the passage. The
XXIX. 10-25.] DAVID'S PRAYER 305
redundant expression ^pz'r: px anS ntr'nj 22' is duplicated by nii'njS
DM 2-yh 13 hpz'D i^N 'rnaSi v. ". — On the style of 296- ^ see Tor. CHV.
p. 26. — With onD3 cdSn njiDB'i lai nti'nji . . . d-ibSn ntrnn nnao an?
29^ cf. the construction nnoo d-'aSn t]hn t\o:l^ q^K hnd onoD an? 22",
see also Tor. CHV p. 22, on Ne. i'". — With nxdjhi 29^, cf. inxdjh
V. ". The article instead of the relative Ti'N is a mark of the Chronicler,
see 1. 119. — The numbers in 29^ and 29' are artificial, the amount being
increased with the inferior value of the metal (cf. Ezr. 6"). Throughout,
cc. 22. 28 /. bear the marks of a free composition. The statements
are general and exaggerated. David prepares things " in abundance,"
" without weight," and " without number." The various materials are
enumerated (22^-^) as they seem to have occurred to the writer. There is
none of the careful detail which characterises i K. 6. There the writer
intends to describe the Temple, here to e.xalt David and the Temple.
The Deuteronomic colouring (22^ ^- 28' ff) does not point to an older
source {contra Bn.), since this readily follows from the Chronicler's use of
Deuteronomic phrases {cf. 2820, 2 Ch. 1,^,^ compared with 2 K. 218).
Nothing indicates that this passage has been worked over by the Chron-
icler. He either wrote it or incorporated the source without material
change. In the latter case it is a free composition of a predecessor who
must have moved in the same circle of ideas.
Considered as a unity from the hand of the Chronicler, the sequence
of subjects is not unnatural. After the determination of the site of the
Temple (2i'-22') follows: the collection of workmen and material
(222-5); Solomon himself is prepared for the undertaking by a parental
charge {22^-^^); the material is transferred and the workmen are placed
at Solomon's command (22'^"); the princes are admonished to support
Solomon by aiding in building the Temple. (The courses of priests and
Levites are prepared cc. 23-26.) In cc. 28/., Solomon is presented to
the general assembly as divinely chosen to build the Temple and to sit
upon his father's throne (28'-"'); the patterns of the buildings (28"")
and of the sacred vessels (28"-'8) are presented to him, followed by the
declaration that they came by divine inspiration (2819); Solomon is ad-
monished and encouraged (282° ' ); the appeal to the princes is made
and they give generously (29'-'); the assembly ends with a prayer
(2910-19)^ blessings (2920), sacrifices (29='), a sacred feast (29""), and the
anointing of Solomon king (29"''). The somewhat parallel passages,
22« ff- and 282 S-, serve distinct purposes in the Chronicler's scheme.
The former leads up to the transfer of the material, and the latter to
the transfer of the pattern. Thus taken as a whole these chapters seem
to come from one hand, and that, with litUe doubt, the Chronicler's.
10-19 c David's closing prayer. — 10. The God of Israel, our
father]. Cf. the fuller expression, "the God of Abraham, of
20
3o6 i CHRONICLES
Isaac, and of Israel, our fathers" (v. '8). — 13. We thank . . . and
praise] i.e., we are continually thanking and praising. — 14. David
humbly confesses that by their free-will offerings (w. =■*) he and
his people are only returning to God what he had first given.
Verse 15 continues the same thought. Yahweh is the real pos-
sessor of the land and Israel's rights are only those of the stranger
("!3) (cf. 22=) and sojourner (iw'iri), i.e., they are entirely de-
pendent upon Yahweh's good will, cf. Ps. 39'^ "2) hq's, also Gn.
2y. Their days on the earth are as a shadow] in their transitori-
ness, cf. Jb. 8', — and there is no hope] EVs. abiding after (^
{yiro^ovr}). The word is used elsewhere only in Ezr. lo^ Je.
148 1^13 ^o'. The thought is, there is no hope or salvation {cf.
the parallel clause in Je. 148) in man apart from Yahweh, an
answer to the question "who am I and who are my people?"
(v. ■«).— 18. O Yahweh, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of
Israel, our fathers {cf. v. '") keep this forever as (for) the imagination
of the thoughts of the heart] i.e., keep thy people in this same gener-
ous spirit which has shown itself in their free-will offerings, — and
establish their hearts unto thee], cf. 1 S. 7^ — 19. A perfect heart].
Cf V. ^.—The palace]. Cf. v. '.
11. Be. inserted qS after "'3 and so also Kau., Bn. Ki. inserts it
before the second i*^. An emendation of the text does not seem neces-
sary, since ^3 may have merely an intensive force (see BDB. '•2 i e),
in which case render yea, everything in the heavens and in the earth. —
14. DD iXyj] occurs also in 2 Ch. 2^ 132" 22' and without n^ with the
same meaning 2 Ch. 14'" 20"; elsewhere only in Dn. 10^ '« 11^. — 16.
pnnn] with the meaning abundance is late, cf. Ec. 5', where it is parallel
to ip3 (1. 28). — N'%i] must be taken as neuter, it is from thy hand, but
Qr. Nin as masc. referring back to \'\'D'r\r\ is better. — 17. Bn. describes
^JN as an explanatory gloss on the basis of 05, but it is not certain that
<j5 did not read ijn. — ixsDjn] n = -\Z'h seel. 119.
20-25. The close of the assembly and Solomon's accession
to the throne. — 20. At David's command to bless Yahweh, all the
assembly blessed Yahweh, the God of their fathers, and bowed
down and prostrated themselves before Yahweh and before the
king]. Both verbs are used of divine worship and of homage
to a royal person, f/. Ex. 4^' i K. i^i. — 21. As was customary on
XXIX. 26-30.] SUMMARY OF DAVID'S REIGN 307
such occasions, sacrifices in abundance], represent the peace-
offerings of which the people partook (Oe.). — 22. The • Chron-
icler omitted the account of Adonijah's attempt to seize the
throne (i K. i) and the consequent exaltation of Zadok to be
chief priest alone (i K. 2^^). Instead, Solomon is represented
as regularly appoinied and anointed, apparently without opposi-
tion, and Zadok was anointed to be priest at the same time, while
David was still living. According to i K. i", it was Zadok who
anointed Solomon. — 23. In i K. 2"' «• the statement "Solomon
sat upon the throne of David" follows the account of David's
death. — On the throne of Yahweh]. Cf. 28^ — 24. Also all the
sons of king David] refers to Adonijah's submission to Solomon
(i K. I"), after his attempt to become David's successor (i K.
j5 B.y — 25. Royal majesty which had not been on any king before
him] can only refer to David and Saul, since the Chronicler ignores
Ish-bosheth. Barnes renders "royal majesty which was not on
any king more than on him," as the Hebrew word for before is
used in Jb. 34'% thus bringing Solomon's reign into comparison
with those of all the kings of Israel, cf. 2 Ch. I'M K. 3 '2.
22. piji'] is wanting in (S^, ^ and is doubtless a gloss intended to har-
monise this verse with 23', where David is said to have made Solo-
mon king over Israel (Bn., Ki.). — ^^\y::^^] ^ Kal expi-crav aiirbv, so also
H, ®. — 24. nnn ni ijnj] cf. 2 Ch. 30^ 'i -\^ un.
26-30. Closing notices of David's reign. — 27. This chron-
ological summary is repeated from i K. 2". More exactly, David
reigned seven years and six months at Hebron (cf. 2 S. 5^). — 29.
Now the acts of David the king, first and last] is the Chronicler's
usual closing formula, cf. 2 Ch. 9=' 12'^ 16", etc. — Doubtless the
Chronicler was influenced by the books of Kings in appending to
the account of each reign a reference to sources for further informa-
tion, but I K. has no such closing citation for the reign of David.
The Chronicler was not satisfied to omit it for David and cites the
acts of Samuel the seer, and the acts of Nathan the prophet, and the
acts of Gad the seer. There can be little doubt that these are
nothing more than references to the narratives in which Samuel,
Nathan, and Gad are mentioned in our books of Samuel. The
3o8 I CHRONICLES
order is the same as that in which they appear in the earlier
historical books. If the Chronicler knew anything about these
men with which we are not familiar from the books of Samuel,
he kept that information to himself. Where he does mention
Nathan (c. 17) and Gad (c. 21), he simply uses material found in
2 S. (cc. 7. 24). He probably quoted the acts of these three men,
instead of simply referring to the one book which contained all of
them, since such an enumeration of works would emphasise the
importance of David's reign. — Samuel, the seer (^i^s1^l) and
Nathan, the prophet (S''iJn) and Gad, the seer (nTrin)]. These
three seem to have had distinct functions as suggested by
the different titles, or at least there were three distinct prophetic
offices in the early times. In the earlier books the first two titles
cling to Samuel (i S. g'' "• '^ >9) and Nathan (i K. i^ 1° " 23. 32. 34.
38. 44 45) but the text varies in regard to Gad (in i S. 22* he is called
the prophet and in 2 S. 24" the prophet, David\': seer). Ro'eh, the
title of Samuel, seems to have signified in the ancient times a "di-
vining priest," like the Babylonian bdril "seer," taking its origin
from the custom of "inspecting" the liver of the sacrificial animal
for omens; hozeh, the title of Gad, which may also be translated
seer or gazer (GAS. The Book of the Twelve Prophets, I. p. 17),
probably originated in the custom of reading the signs of the
heavens, etc.; nabi\ the title of Nathan, doubtless signified one who
laid claim to direct revelation through an ecstatic condition brought
on by music and singing like the howling dervishes (Jastrow, JBL.
XXVIII, 1909, pp. 42 _^.). But that these distinctions were ever
clearly maintained in Israel is open to question. Certain it is
that the term nabV under the influence of Elijah and his successors
threw off the earlier and cruder significance and came to be the
special title of the true prophets of Yahweh of the later day. At
the same time it is likely that the terms hozeh and ro^eh were later
used as mere synonyms of naW without any evil meaning being
attached to them as has been alleged (Jastrow, op. cit.). This
was certainly the case in the time of the Chronicler, whose retention
of the distinguishing titles of the earlier books does not imply a
careful differentiation of their meaning on his part. — 30. With all
his reign and his mighty i.e., with the whole account of his reign,
XXIX. 26-30.] SUMMARY OF DAVID'S REIGN 309
including all the times that passed over him (cf. Ps. 31'^ "5>), the
vicissitudes of his life, and over Israel, the events of the nation,
aud over all the kingdoms of the lands, those countries with which
David came into contact, as Philistia, Edom, Moab, Ammon,
etc. With the phrase kingdoms of the lands, cf. 2 Ch. 128 17'"
20".
26-27. (B omits -\^D i^-x a''C\ni : Sn'-ic-i Sr hy. — i K. ?", the parallel
to V. ", has D^ju- after anhm D^'tt'Siy, and so <g, H, &. (5. — 30. (g adds
the first verse of 2 Ch. i.
A COMMENTARY ON
2 CHRONICLES
!
COMMENTARY ON 2 CHRONICLES.
I-IX. THE HISTORY OF SOLOMON.
In relating the history of Solomon {c. 977-937 B.C.), the Chron-
icler has omitted as foreign to his purpose, or conveying a too un-
favourable impression of Solomon, the following particulars given
in I K. i-ii: the circumstances attending Solomon's accession to
the throne (i K. 1-2); his marriage with Pharaoh's daughter and
the sacrifices at the high places (i K. 3' -2); the story of his judg-
ment between the harlots (i K. 3'«-^5); the list of his officers and
the provision for his court, and the account of his wisdom (i K.
4-5" (4)); the mention of his palace and the adjoining buildings
(i K. 7'-'^); and likewise his worship of foreign deities, and the
trouble of his latter days (i K. 11). And also in the account of
the Temple the Chronicler has omitted the promise inserted in the
midst of its description (i K. 6"-"); the statement of the length
of the period of its construction (i K. 6"-=»), and portions of the
description of its ornamental work (i K. 6"-3«) and of its lavers
(i K. 727-39), And he has otherwise abridged, also, the account of
the building and its furniture; its general dimensions (i K. 6'"'
compared with 3'-'); the most holy place (i K. 6'^-" compared
with 38-9) ; the two cherubim (i K. 6"-28 compared with 3"'-'0 ; the
two pillars (i K. 71=*-" compared with 3'^-"). Characteristic inser-
tions also have been made in the narrative : the explanation of the
high place at Gibeon (i'-^; the choir of Levites with the priests
(5"-"); a quotation from a Levitical psalm (6" '■); fire and cloud
from Yahweh (7'-'); the appointment of priests and Levites
(8'^"^), and minor annotations and changes. Much of the narra-
tive also, while clearly dependent upon Kings, has been practically
rewritten, especially the negotiations with Hiram (i K. s'^-^' <'-'">
compared with 22-'< w-is)),
3^i
314
2 CHRONICLES
I KINGS I-XI COMPARED WITH 2 CHRONICLES I-IX.
K.
1-3'
ol6-S8
4-5" (4)
1-15-26 (1-12)
r27-32 (13-18)
61-11
6l3f.
614-22
623-28
629-36
637-38
^I-ll
^13-22
^40-47
^48-50
7"
gi-n
Solotnon's Accession and Marriage
Preparations for Worship at Gibeon
Yahweh's Revelation at Gibeon
Solomon's Wealth an(d Horse-trade
The Judgment between the Harlots
Solomon's Officers, Provision, and
Wisdom
The Negotiations with Hiram
Solomon's Workmen
Building and Structure of Temple
Promise
The Most Holy Place
The Cherubim
Ornamental Work
Time Occupied in Building the Temple
Solomon's Palace
The Pillars before the Temple
The Brazen Altar
The Great Basin
The Bases of the Layers
The Lavers
The Candlesticks
Summary of the Works of Hiram
Vessels that Solomon Made
Completion of the Work
The Ark Brought In
812-63 Solomon's Address and Prayer
85^-" Solomon's Blessing of the People
862-64 Sacrificial Ceremonies
865 f. The Feasting
91-9 Yahweh's Covenant with Solomon
Qio-14 Cities Given to Hiram
915-23 Solomon's Cities and Levy
Ch.
Omitted.
1 1-5 wanting in K.
i6-i3 abridged.
114-17 taken from i K.
I026-29.
Omitted
Omitted.
2315 rewritten.
21 (2). 16 f. (17 1.) repeated
and abridged.
3'-' abridged with slight
new matter.
Omitted.
3»'- abridged.
310-H rewritten.
Omitted.
Omitted.
Omitted.
315-17 greatly condensed.
4' wanting in K.
42-5 reproduced.
Omitted.
4* abridged and anno-
tated.
47-10 wanting in K.
41118 rewritten.
419 22 slight changes.
5< no change.
S^-K musical service
added.
61" almost no varia-
tion.
71' condensed, new
feature.
7^-' annotated.
78.10 annotated.
711-2- enlarged.
8' -2 reconstructed.
8'-"' considerable
change.
1. 1-13.] SOLOMON AT GIBEON 315
K. Ch.
9"* Residence of Pharaoh's Daughter 8" reconstructed.
g'^ Solomon's Offering S'^^-'s greatly enlarged.
p26-28 Solomon's Marine Trade 8'' '• rewritten.
10'-" Visit of Queen of Sheba 9'''' very slight varia-
tions.
ioM-29 Solomon's Wealth 9"--8 very slight varia-
tions.
Ill-*" Solomon's Apostasy and Adversaries Omitted.
ii<' '• Sources of Solomon's History ^29 -31 enlarged.
Sources: The following is the source analysis given by Ki. after
Bn. in which B. = Biblical source, i.e., i K.: i'-« Chr.; '-'' B.; »-2'5 d"
Chr.'s Forerunner; 'e-'' "'-'s) Chr.; 3'-5Chr.'sF.; ^post-Chr.; '-'^Chr.'s
F.; 4' Chr.; ^-^ B.; «-9 Chr.'s F.; '«-s' B. but post-Chr.; s^-"* B.; '">-i3a
B. but post-Chr.; i3b-642 B. with 65b- i3. 32b 40-42 f^m Chr.; 7>-6 Chr.'s
F.; « Chr.; --8'' Chr.'s F.; '^-'s Chr.; '^-u Chr.'s F.; g'-^* B.; 25-28 B.
but post-Chr.; 29 Chr.; ^o B. The basis of this analysis as far as it re-
veals a Forerunner of the Chronicler has already been given {v. pp.
25/.), and the conclusion rejected. The only source apparent is K.
I. 1-13. The promise to Solomon at Gibeon. — Vv. ' ^ are from
the Chronicler, while vv. «-" depend upon i K. 3^-"- ^^'^ 4'. — 1. For
Solomon's accession to the throne cf. i Ch. 23' 29". — Strengthened
himself] (pTnri'') a common expression in Chronicles to denote
one's firm establishment in rule or in the maintenance of power (cf.
J2i3 jy. 8. 21 j^8 159 jyi 2i4 23' 25" 27^ 325 I Ch. ii'° 19'^, see also
Dn. io'5-2ij use of verb in earlier books both rarer and more dis-
tinctive, 1. 38). — And magnified him exceedingly]. Cf. i Ch. 29". —
2. And Solomon gave commandment to all Israel, etc.] a character-
istic touch of the Chronicler (cf. i Ch. 13' « •, where David consults
with all Israel respecting the removal of the ark). The narra-
tive of Kings knows nothing, in connection with Solomon's visit
to Gibeon, of such pomp as is implied in this and the following
verse. — 3. The high place]. The Chronicler adopts this expres-
sion from I K. y, where Gibeon is called the great high place. The
sanctuary at Gibeon was undoubtedly an ancient one of Canaan-
itish origin. Gibeon is the mod. ed Dschib, five or six miles north-
west of Jerusalem (cf. Buhl, GAP. pp. 168/.). — Because there was
the tent, etc.]. * Cf. i Ch. 2i2». This is the Chronicler's explanation
of Solomon's sacrifice at Gibeon. The remark has no historical
3l6 2 CHRONICLES
foundation, but otherwise the act of Solomon would have been a
violation of the law of P (Lv. 17^ '•). Whatever "tent of meet-
ing" ancient Israel may have had, it had been replaced by the
temple at Shiloh (i S. 3' Je. 7'2- '< 26').— 4. Cf. i Ch. 15, 16.—
5. The brazen altar . . . was there] a further vindication
of the legitimacy of Solomon's sacrifice at Gibeon. On the
brazen altar and Bezalel cf. Ex. 31'-' 38'-'. — And Solomon and
the assembly sought him] i.e., Yahweh (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau.,
Bn., Ki.). //, with reference to the altar, is the rendering of (g,
AV., RV. The former is preferable.
1. ptnnM] characteristic expression of the Chronicler {v. s.).—
inioVp] kingdom late word cf. 1 Ch. 11'" 1. 67. — ray. . . nin>i] cf. i
Ch. ii^.— nSi'DS] cf. I Ch. 142, 1.87.— 2. ics'] late force of give com-
mand, cf. I Ch. i4'2, 1. 4. — D^aDirSi] possibly a corruption for a"J2i:'n
before which na-Si has fallen out, cf. "M et ducibus et judicihus, and
D-BDari >-ity in the lists of i Ch. 28" 296. These words are confused
elsewhere, cf. (&^ tQv Kpirdv where i Ch. 28' has d^idd'^h, also ^^Tif for
^tastt' in 2 S. 7? cp. i Ch. 176. — Snt^^ S3S2]eithet a repetition of VKna-^ SjS'
(Be., Ke., Zoe.) or better modifies H^^i h^f, every worthy of all Israel
(Oe., Kau., Ki.).— nn« >ii'xi] cf 52^ (1. 104), either in apposition with
V^ SoS (Be., Ke., Zoe.) or better in apposition with i^-'Vi (Bn.). —
4. Sas] decided adversative in late Heb., cf. 19' 3317 Ezr. lo's Dn.
lo'- 2', 1. I.— pana] equivalent to 'n nrsa, Ges. § 138/, cf. i Ch. 1512.
—h naj -'D -i^n] {cf. 2 S. 6") are wanting in (g'' but the words probably
fell out by homoeoteleuton. — 5. ar] so <&, B, generally adopted; Bom-
berg ed. QB\— mti-TiM] ($, B, AV., RV., render the suffix with reference
to the altar.
7-13. Taken from i K. 35-i3i5b 41. The passage in Chronicles is
just two-thirds as long as that in Kings, and has been condensed
with much skill, gaining in force. The somewhat verbose mention
of the favour shown to David (i K. 3^) has been appropriately
shortened. The allusion to the son on the throne appears in the
form of the Messianic promise, a clear suggestion of 2 S. 7, which
(according to SBOT.) is later than this narrative in Kings. The
idea of Solomon's weakness is omitted and the phrase "go out and
in" (i K. 3') is happily used to express the object of the request for
knowledge and wisdom that he might go in and out royally before
his people. The dream also of Kings (w.^'s) has disappeared.
I. 14-17.] SOLOMON'S WEALTH 317
The revelation is thus a more direct one, given in that night (v. ')
instead of merely " by night " (i K. 3^). Elohim (v. ') has been sub-
stituted for Yahweh (i K. 3% cf. 1 Ch. i3«). V. '^ in Kings with its
Deuteronomic promise of "length of days" on the condition of obe-
dience has been entirely omitted, possibly because it was recognised
that Solomon did not attain extreme old age. — 9. Let thy promise
(word), etc.], the promise that Solomon, his son, should succeed
to the throne, build the house of Yahweh, and that his throne should
be estabUshed forever (i Ch. 225^). This promise had already
been partially established, for thou hast made me king, hence with
firm faith Solomon prays for its complete fulfilment. 10. Wis-
dom (riDDn) and knowledge (j;"It2)] since these are necessary to one
who would judge righteously, cf. i K. 3'. — That I may go out and
come in before this people]. The Chronicler represents Solomon as a
man of peace, hence these words probably do not refer to Solomon
as the head of the host (cf. i Ch. ii^ i S. i8"- •") (Bn.) but rather
include any transaction of business (Ba.). — 11. Because this was
in thy heart]. Cf. 1 Ch. 22' 28^. — 12. Such as none of the kings
have had that have been before thee]. Cf i Ch. 292=,
10. >-i?:] late Heb., also in vv. "■ '^ Dn. i^ " Ec. lo^" f.— H. ='D3J]
common in Aram. Cf. Ec. s's where with t-7 and Ec. 6^ where with
•\'ify and 1133 as here; elsewhere Jos. 22' f- — 12. jinj] sg. with com-
pound subj., cf. Est 31'.— 13. r^^22^] read after (&, H ns^nn, or omit
pj,'3J3 . . . nsaS as a misplaced gloss (Ba.).
14-17. Solomon's wealth. — Taken from i K. io=« ^^ and re-
peated in part in 9"-2 8. The Chronicler has omitted the story of the
harlots (i K. 3 '6-28) and the account of Solomon's civil government
and the prosperity and greatness of his kingdom given in i K. 4-5 '«
(c. 4). These in i K. illustrate the fulfilment of the divine promise
which came in answer to Solomon's prayer at Gibeon. The
Chronicler passed over the story of the harlots probably because it
contained so little of the religious element, and he probably chose
as an illustration of material glory these few verses instead of
the longer passage for the sake of abridgment, and because he
was not interested in any form of government that was not ec-
clesiastical.
3l8 2 CHRONICLES
This passage appears twice, more or less fully, in both 2 Ch. and i K.,
before and after the account of the building of the Temple in each, as
follows:
2 Ch. i'<-" taken from i K. lo^^-Js.
2 Ch. 9=^-28 taken from i K. 5« lo^^"^ 5' 10=' 2».
It will be seen that the first account in Ch. is taken from the second
in K., and the second in Ch. from the first in K. (being supplemented
by parts from the second in K.). In K. the two accounts are variant,
differing in the number of chariots, the first ascribing 40,000 "stalls
of horses for the chariots " to Solomon and the second giving him
only 1,400 chariots at the end of his reign. The Chronicler regarded
these as two separate summaries of the chariots of Solomon, one at
the beginning and the other at the close of his reign, and reversed the
order, since it was more appropriate that Solomon should begin his
reign with 1,400 chariots and later have 40,000 (so read in 2 Ch. 9^
V. in loco) than that the reverse should be true. The introductory word
in the second account in K., ^id-sm he gathered together, i.e., organised,
supported the Chronicler in placing that account first.
14. Chariots and horsemen]. These were not used by Israel in
their early warfare, since they at first occupied the mountainous
parts of Palestine, but when under David they became an ag-
gressive state and extended their borders, chariots and horsemen
were gradually introduced (cf. for chariots i Ch. i8< =28. 8^), and
under Solomon, as here expressed, the purchase of chariots and
horses became a regular trade. — A thousand and four hundred].
In I K. 5« (4") 40,000 stalls of horses for chariots are mentioned,
in 9« 4,000 {q. v.). — Chariot cities]. Cf. S^ i K. 9''.— 15, Silver
and gold]. Their abundance came through Solomon's commerce.
Cedars], the most durable, and so valuable, timber, which came
from the forests of Lebanon, and thus was an import. — Sycamores],
not the tree kno\\-n by that name in England and America, but a
tree of the genus of the fig (cf. 1 Ch. 27 2^) whose wood, since it grew
close at hand, was very plentiful for Jerusalem. — 16, Horses].
The horse mentioned in the OT. was the war-horse. — Egypt].
Horses were introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos (during the
period of the thirteenth to the seventeenth dynasties, 1 788-1580
B.C., Breasted, History of the Ancient Egyptians, p. 425), and in
later d}-nasties the " stables of Pharaoh contained thousands of the
best horses to be had in Asia" (lb. p. 195), hence the importation
I. 14-17.] SOLOMON'S WEALTH 319
of horses and chariots, which were widely used in Egypt, into Pal-
estine would have been most natural (v. ")• The securing of horses
from Egypt is also strongly favoured by Dt. 17'^ Is. 31'. But it is
possible that instead of Egypt {WI'^'Q Mizraim) we should read
Miizri OlXa) and think of a land in Asia Minor {v. i.). — 17. Six
hundred of silver] i.e., shekels, in value about $380. — And so for all
the kings of the Hittites and of Syria they used to bring them out hy
their means, or they (chariots and horses) used to be exported (v. i.)
by their means]. Horses and chariots were brought also out of
Egypt by the king's traders for the Hittite and Syrian kings at the
same price as for Solomon. — The Hittites], a people mentioned
frequently among the inhabitants of Canaan (Gn. 15^" Ex. 3'" 13=
et al.), but their proper home was in the north — even in the high
lands of Asia Minor, Cilicia, and Cappadocia. They dwelt in
power between the Euphrates and the Orontes, centred at Kadesh
and Carchemish, but were finally subdued in the eighth century by
the Assyrians. — Syria] (Aram), Mesopotamia, but often applied
to the kingdom of Damascus and the adjoining petty kingdoms,
Maacah, Geshur, Rehob, and Zobah {EBi.). A trade with the kings
of these people and districts would be less natural from Egypt than
from the nearer Muzri of Asia Minor.
14. cn'::i] I K. 10=6 anj^i; Ch. has the true reading supported by all
the Vrss. in K. — 15. jnrn nNi] wanting in ^ of i K. 10", but (& (both
here and K.) rb xpvfflov Kal t6 apyvpiov. Probably originally from Ch.
— 16. Ni|i!;] I K. io-« nipD. Instead of HI drove of horses (still preferred
by Kau.), Be. already discerned here ID and the name of a place (so
(S'^'- in K., 'B here), which is the view of most modern scholars, either
Kueor Koa, a district of Cilicia (Winckler, Alt. Unter. 168 jf. Altorienlal.
Forschiuigen, i. 28, Bn., Ki., Bur., Sk.), or, better, a place in the direc-
tion of Egypt (Stade and Schwally, SBOT.). In the former case ansn is
Muzri, a N. Syrian land S. of the Taurus, which often figures in Assyrian
inscriptions. With this agrees Ez. 27'', since Togarmah, the source of
horses, war-horses, and mules, lies in that direction. But Dt. i7'«
Is. 31' decidedly favour the reference to a place near Egypt. Cf. also
Jerome's Onomasticon, 273. 86, in. 8 Coa qua est juxta Mgyptum.
Hence we render and Solomon's import of horses was from Egypt (or
from Muzri) and from Koa: the traders of the king used to bring them
from Koa at a price (so Ki. BH., Bn.). Kau. retains M but omits KipD*
and renders "And the royal merchants were accustomed to bring a
320 2 CHRONICLES
drove for payment." This is preferred by WTiitehouse, EBi. I. coL
726. The question of the true reading must remain sub lite. — 17.
iN>sri iSpi] I K. 10" Nxr.i nSpm. — d-m< ^sSsi] i K. 'n ^j'^sSi. — in<sv]
(gBAjji of J j;_ ,j<x>, which is preferred by Ki.
I. 18-VII. The Building and Dedication of the Temple.
I. 18-11. 1. Solomon's purpose and the levy of workmen.
— 18 (1). This verse is entirely from the Chronicler. — A house for
the name of Yahweh]. Cf 1 K. 5'' "' i Ch. 22'- i"- " 28' 29'«. — And
a house for his kingdom] i.e., the royal palace and group of build-
ings described in i K. 71-'= but only mentioned incidentally by the
Chronicler in 2" "2) yn g". — 1 (2). Derived from i K. 5" «• "^ f);
here out of place; repeated in w. '^f- "^t.)^ which see. The
reason for this repetition is not clear. The doublet occurs also
in (8 of I K., where cp. 2"d.h -^yjth 515 f. tHeb.zgf.j, Sometimes the
Chronicler may have written from memory and later repeated
in full, having noticed that his first mention was incomplete (Be.).
I. 18. -1CN11] with force of command or purpose followed by inf. 0- 4)-
—II. 1, rtri'-y •\B0^^] i K. 52' nc^jyh idm. — ^Sn] sing, after te)is, a usage
of Ez. and P, Ges. | 1345. — ti^x] sing, after l'^^', another usage of P.
Ges. § 134^. Wanting in i K., where KS'i appears before SjD.
2-9 (3-10). Solomon's message to Hiram.— This is based
upon I K. 515-20 (1-6) 5ut quite rewritten by the Chronicler, or taken
from another source (Bn., Ki.). The foUowing particulars given in
I K. are wanting in Ch. : (i) The embassy from Hiram to Solomon
(i K. 5>=(")- (2) David's hindrance in building the Temple (i K.
5"<'>). (3) The rest given to Solomon (i K. s'^u)). (4) The
promise of Yahweh to David (i K. 5' '(=>). The last three, however,
are embodied in i Ch. 228"'. And the following are added in Ch. :
(i) The dealings of Hiram with David (v. =")). (2) A description
of the Temple as a place of offerings and as being very great (yv.^'-
"'•')• (3) Words of self-depreciation (v.'t^'). (4) A petition for a
skilled worker in metals and cloth who also is an engraver (v. «(')).
(5) An enumeration of the kinds of wood desired (v. 7a(8a))_ (g)
The contribution to Hiram's servants (v.'"")). — 2 (3). Huram],
I K. 5's") Hiram, see i Ch. 14K— As thou didst do, etc.]. The sen-
tence is incomplete. Supply, "So do with me." On the trans-
action cf. 2 S. 5" I Ch. 14'. According to i Ch. 22' David had
I. 18-n. 17.] PREPARATIONS FOR THE TEMPLE 32 1
already procured an abundance of timber for the Temple. — 3 (4).
The Chronicler thinks of the Temple chiefly as the place of the
ministration of the priests and the Levites, cf. i Ch. 23=" « , and
avoids the thought of the building being the dwelling-place of God.
He enumerates the incense of sweet spices burned every morning
and evening (Ex. sCf), the perpetual shew-bread (Ex. 25"), the
daily morning and evening sacrifices (Nu. 28' -8), and the extra
offerings of the Sabbaths (Nu. 289 '■), of the beginning of months
(Nu. 28" -'5), and of the set feasts (Nu. 28'«-29s«). — Forever this
{i.e., such service) is (binding) upon Israel]. Cf. Nu. 19'° i Ch. 23".
— 4 (5). Cf. I Ch. 29' Ex. 18". — 5 (6). The heaven of heavens], the
highest sphere of the heavens, cf. 6's i K. 8". — But to offer incense
before thee]. The purpose isnot to erect a dwelling-place for Yahweh,
which would be presumptuous, but merely a place of sacrifice, i.e.,
worship. — 6(7). Kings knows of no such request for a workman, but
states that Solomon sent and brought such a skilled metal-worker
from Tyre (i K. 7"). The skill in weaving and engraving is an
addition of the Chronicler. His need of such a workman is shown
in I Ch. 292 (see corrected text).^With the wise men, etc.]. Cf.
I Ch. 2 2'5. — 7 (8). Cypress and al gum trees]. Only cedar trees are
mentioned in i K. 52" (6) but cypress also in i K. 524(10). Since the
algum trees are clearly the same as the almug trees of i K. 10",
i.e., sandalwood or ebony (Bn.), the Chronicler is here apparently
involved in an inaccuracy in deriving them a product of Ophir,
from Lebanon (Be., Ke., Zoe., Ba., Bn., Ki.). — And my servants,
etc.], taken from i K. 5=°(6'. — 9 (10). In the message of
I K. no compensation is specified (i K. 52°'^')) but later it is re-
corded that Solomon, presumably for the timber received, gave
Hiram yearly for his house 20,000 cors of wheat and 20 cors of
oil (i K. 5=^f- ""f- '). Here the gift is for the support of the labourers,
whether yearly or simply a gross amount is not stated, and 20,000
cors of barley and 20,000 baths of wine are added, and the amount
of oil is increased from twenty cors to 20,000 baths; or, since 10
baths = one cor, a hundredfold ((SI in i K. has the same amount) ;
a cor represents about eight bushels.
10-15(11-16). The answer of Hiram.— This is based upon
I K. 5=' -23 '7-9), and as in the case of Solomon's message is either
21
322 2 CHRONICLES
rewritten or taken by the Chronicler from another source (Bn., Ki.).
The jnain variation is the reference to the skilled workman sent
agreeable to Solomon's request (vv.>= '• <" ' >). — 10 (11). Chronicles
emphasises the fact of a written reply from Hiram, which is not
directly stated in Kings. — 11 (12). This verse comes in so awk-
wardly with the allusion to Solomon in the third person instead of
the second as in the previous verse, that possibly it should be trans-
posed with V. '» <"' (Kau., Bn., Ki.) giving the reflection of Hiram
on receiving the request from Solomon an«d thus introductory to the
written reply and parallel with i K. 5 •(^>. The avowal of Yahiveh
as the maker of heaven and earth by Hiram is a noticeable touch
by the Chronicler, who has no difficulty in seeing in the heathen
king a reverer of Yahweh. — 12 (13). Hurajn-abi], the name
of the skilled workman in i K. y'^- *"■ " called Hiram. The latter
half of the name (abi) should be rendered as a title of respect my
father (Be., Zoe., Oe., Ba.), or better, wy trusted counsellor, cf. Gn.
45*; Bevre'pov 7rarp6<i 01 add. to Est. 3" (v.« of add.); tw Trarpi 1
Mac. ii« (Tor. AJSL. Jan. '09, p. 172, n. 17). — 13 (14). In
I K. 7'< the mother of this workman is a widow of the tribe of
Naphtali. The reading of the Chronicler may have come from
the influence of Ex. 31% where Oholiab, one of the artificers of
the tabernacle, is of the tribe of Dan. Cf. further on this verse
y_6 (7)_ — 14 (15). Cf. V.5 <'°'. The expression my lord puts Hiram
relatively on the footing of a vassal. There is nothing like this
in Kings. — 15 (16). Yapho, mod. Yaffa, the port of Jerusalem,
is not mentioned in Kings.
1&-17 (17-18). Solomon's workmen. — These are represented
as taken after a census from the aliens in Israel. This is the Chron-
icler's adaptation or abridgment of i K. ^-'-^^ (13 is)^ where two
levies of workmen are mentioned, evidently a combination of two
sources (Kau.? Ki., Bur., 550r.). The first levy (w. ^^ f- <'=f >),
30,000 out of all Israel, sent 10,000 a month in turn to Leba-
non, is entirely passed over by the Chronicler. The second levy,
the burden bearers and hewers and overseers (\w. "'• <'^'>)> ^^^
Chronicler gives, but prefaces the list with the statement of a census
taken by Solomon of all the aliens in Israel, whose number exactly
equals that of the workmen, i.e., 153,600 (v. '« <"'), and whom
I. 18-n. 17.] PREPARATIONS FOR THE TEMPLE 323
Solomon divides and sets to work according to the arrangement
given in Kings (v. " c^)). The Chronicler's motive of reconstruc-
tion is clearly to free native Israelites from the stigma of hard,
serf -like labour. This burden'is imposed upon foreigners. — 16 (17).
With which David his father numbered them]. Cf. i Ch. 222. —
17 (18). Threejhousand and six hundred overseers]. This proba-
bly was the original reading in Kings and not the present text,
three thousand and three hundred.
2. irxo] introduces a comparative sentence of two clauses of which
the second member is wanting. — 3. •'Jn] Oi + ^:2. — e^cd] spices, used in
incense; only used in pi. abs., cf. 13", elsewhere only in P. — .iji>'c]
tech. term used only of the shew-bread, cf. Lv. 24^ «• i Ch. 9^2 232s 2815
2 Ch. 13" 29'8 Ne. io'<. PI. Lv. 24S f. See also 13". Here along with
niS>' governed by n^apriS through zeugma. — T'nn] adv. in gen. relation
Koe. iii. § 3i8d. The idea of perpetuity and the word T'DH are derived
from Lv. 24^. — 5. no nxyi ini] cf. i Ch. 29". — 6. D;n](5 + Kal elSSra, cf.
V. '^. — pjix] late form of pjnx deep red purple. — S^did] crimson only
here and v. " 3'^ prob. a Pers. loan-word (BDB.) for the more usual
ija> n>'Sin (Bn.). — nSrn] deep blue purple. — 'ui uy] modifies niiry':' and
nPij"^. — 7. d^ouSn] so .also 9""-, the latter || to i K. lonf- d^jdSn f,
form dub. — 8. pjnSi] 1 explicative. Behold thy servants shall he with
my servants even to prepare, etc. (Ke., RV.), but Oe., Kau., Ki., begin a
new sentence (or continuation of n'^tr) (Be.) And timber in abundance
must be prepared for me. Ges. § 114/. — xSsn] inf. abs. as an adv. with
adj. force Ges. § 113^. — 9. 'pnj] Ges. § 106m. — niDc] i K. 525 ,-iS3D=.-i'?0Na
the true reading, so Vrss. — 11. njo'' iii'n] Heb. tense has force of
subj. Dr. TH. 38 (/3).— 12. ^-^^•.^•] Ges. § 106/^, Dr. TH. 10.—
ns omn^] S with the force of namely BDB. "? 5 e (d). The artisan's
name Huram is given in i K. 7'3 as Hiram. — 13. p nij3 JD nrx p] r
K. 7" •h\DQi nana Nin ^JD'?^? nu-x p, v. s. — anj;:]!] (g + Kal v(palvei.v —
j'in'^1 may go back only to a dittography, but notice the following infini-
tives.— 15. iD-is]-i-is dT. Aram. cf. Ecclus. S:* + often. — nnDDi] rafts,
Att. etym. doubtful, i K. 523 nnoT also air. — 17. hio] 1 K. 52*
III. 1-2. The place and date of the building of the Tem-
ple.— 1. Entirely independent of Kings. — In the mountain oj
Moriah]. The Temple mount in Jerusalem is identified with the
mountain in the land of Moriah where Abraham offered Isaac
(Gn. 222). The name occurs only here and there and in the latter
passage it may represent a textual corruption, earlier, however,
324 2 CHRONICLES
than the time of Chronicles. — Where Yahweh appeared unto David
his father in the place which David had prepared in the threshing-
floor of Oman the Jebnsite*]. Cf. i Ch. 21"". After the reve-
lation of Yahweh at the threshing-floor, David began at once to
prepare to build there the Temple (i Ch. 22'-''). — 2. The date
of this verse is taken from i K. 6' with the omission of "the four
hundred and eightieth year of the Exodus," and likewise the name
of the second month, "Ziv," given in Kings. Solomon came to
the throne about 977. — In the second month]. Any reference to
the day of the month is wrongly in the text (v. i.). The second
month was approximately from the middle of April to the middle
of May.
3-7. The general dimensions of the porch and the holy place.
— Abridged from i K. 6-- '■ '^-'*- ='■ '" omitting entirely the matter of
vv. ''-s in Kings, i.e., the mention of the windows, the side chambers
of the Temple, its method of construction, and the side door and
the stairs. — 3. And these are the foundations which Solomon laid
in building the hoiise of God] i.e., this is the ground plan of the
house. The reference is to the dimensions immediately given. —
The length after the former measure]. Before the exile the Hebrews
used a cubit longer by a handbreadth than the one in use after the
exile (Bn. ArcJi. pp. 179/.) and the dimensions of the Temple, says
the Chronicler, were according to this earlier measure. The two
cubits of Egyptian origin were in the ratio of 7 to 6; the earlier one
was 527 mm. (20.74 inches), the latter 450 mm. (17.72 inches) (Now.
Arch. p. 201). The height of the Temple, thirty cubits, given in
Kings, is omitted, being out of place in the ground plan, cf. v.^.
— 4. And the porch which was in front of the house: its length was
twenty cubits before {i.e., according to) the breadth of the house and
the height twenty cubits^]. (Oe., Ki.) Since the Temple was only
thirty cubits in height, the reading of ^, one hundred and twenty
cubits for the height of the porch, is universall}- regarded as a tex-
tual corruption. The numeral hundredwas probably inserted in the
text by some one who was thinking of Herod's Temple, the porch
of which was 100 cubits in height. For height, thirty cubits have
been preferred to twenty (Be.). For another rendering see below.
The overlaying of the porch with gold is not mentioned in Kings,
m. 1-17.] ARCHITECTURE OF THE TEMPLE 325
although perhaps imphed i K. 6'°". Such overlaying with gold
as is mentioned here and in vv. ^^- probably never took place, since
such gold-plating is not mentioned in connection with the plunder-
ing of the Temple by foes (i K. i42« 2 K. 14'^) nor when stript by
King Ahaz in financial straits. The metal covering by Hezekiah
mentioned in 2 K. 18'^ was probably not gold (Bn., EBi. iv. col.
4932). — 5. And the greater room (Heb. house)] i.e., the holy
place. — With cypress wood]. In Kings only cedar is mentioned
except for the floor (i K. 6'^- '»). — Palms and garlands], bas-
relief work (cf. I K. 6'8- "• 32. 35), — g, j^^d hg garnished (Heb.
overlaid) the house], the whole Temple (Be. and so evidently
most comm.); the holy place (Kau.), which is more agreeable to
the context. — With costly stones]. The idea evidently is of
precious stones set in the walls, although it has been suggested
that they were costly flagstones for the floor (Kau.). — Parwaim],
apparently the name of a gold-producing place conjectured in
Arabia (BDB.), yet really dubious. Sprenger (Die alte Geogr.
Arabiens, pp. 54/.) identifies with farwa in SW. Arabia, citing
the Arabian historian Hamdani (f. 940 A.D.), while Glaser (Skiz.
pp. S47 ff.) finds Parwaim in el-farwain mentioned by the same
historian as a gold-mine in NE. Arabia (see Guthe, PRE.' 14,
p. 705). — This verse has no parallel in i K. — 7. A continuation of
the description of the holy place. — And he carved chernbim on the
wall], an inference from i K. 6", which appears to conflict with
I K. 6'^ Cherubim were on the walls of the Temple described by
Ezekiel (41'^).
1. ^ has nin^ as subject of hn-ij, and (5, S>, V, the order psn •yofn DipD3.
This gives the true text (Kau., Bn., Ki.). To adhere to 1^ gives a
very harsh reading, viz. Then Solomon began to build the house of
Yahweh on Mount Moriah where he [Yahweh] appeared unto David
his father which [house] he [Solomon] prepared in the place of David
[i.e., that D. had appointed] in the threshing-floor of Oman the Jebusite.
See RV. — 2. uca] wanting in three Mss., 05, B, and to be omitted as a
dittography (Be., Ke., Oe., Zee., Kau., Bn., Ki.). "In the second [day]"
RV., would naturally be expressed by Z'-^rh D''j::'3. Ges. § 134/'. — 3. hSni]
looks toward several following subjects, Koe. iii. § 349n. — iDin] inf.
used as a subst. Koe. iii. § 233a. This Hoph. inf. also used by the
Chronicler of the founding of the Temple in Ezr. 3" |. — 4. ^ is mean-
326 2 CHRONICLES
ingless. The following readings have been proposed: icn o'?iNni
a^-^-z-; PDN njjni D^2n am >jfl ^-j on;:'y pick 13-iN non ^jo Sj; (Oe., Ki.)
after <& (which has O''::^ after 'Jfl '?>?' and (S'^ twenty cubits for the height)
and I K. 6^" 3m ijd "^y 13->n noN ontrp n^an Sd^h ■'jb Vj; o'riNni. The
clause a'•^B'y1 hnd najni is entirely lacking in K. hnd (z;. 5.) is plainly a
corruption, since a porch of the height of 1 20 feet would be a '^"iJS tower.
Since the height of the Temple was thirty cubits, some prefer to read
Dia'Sc mcN najni (Be.). Also <" is read •^^z'y r^-<2r^ '7D\n >jfi Sy ib'K dSinhi
onrp niDX n^an am ijo Sy i-ixni lam n::N3 (Be., Kau.), ajid the porch
which was iu front of the main room of the building was ten cubits broad
and the length according to [Heb. before] the breadth of the building
twenty cubits. Since a statement of the height is out of place in a de-
scription which purports to give the ground-plan {cf. vv. 2- * where the
Chronicler omits the height given in i K.), and the breadth is expected,
this reading is preferable. More likely, however, the Chronicler placed
these dimensions in the order in which they appear in his source (i K.
6'), hence we prefer niDN n^an am ijs Sj? iisn non ijo hy -\Z'H dSinhi
nry nicN amm onry and the porch which was before the house: the length
according to tlie breadth of the house was twenty cubits and the breadth
ten cubits. This requires the least number of changes and the last three
words could easily be corrupted into ons'yi nxa najni. — 5. ncn] late
word used especially in Piel. — aia] many Mss., (6 ■\ina. — vSy H'm] cf.
BDB. n'^jj Hiph. 4, used of ornamentation howsoever made cf. v. '^ —
onc.n] in I K. 6-9- 22. 35 ^ae nnnn. — miJ'T^i'] i K. 7", in description of
tabernacle (Ex. 28'^- - ,^g'°)> chains, in i K. 62' D"'XX iiiaD garlands
of flowers, open flowers, RV. See tjd BDB.
8-9. The most holy place. — Greatly condensed from i K.
5i6.2o_ — 8^ Cf. I K. 6-". The third equal dimension of the most
holy place has been omitted by the Chronicler. — Of six hundred
talents], a particular not given in Kings. According to the
lightest calculation for a talent (i.e., the latest Jewish weight
system 45 lbs.) the weight would be 27,000 lbs. (DB. iv. 906 a).
The more usual light weight given for a talent is 108.29 ^t»s.
(BDB.); that would give 64,974 lbs. Both amounts seem
incredible. The amount is doubtless a free invention of the
Chronicler. Possibly he thought of fifty talents for each tribe,
V. I Ch. 21". — 9, The nails] were intended to fasten the sheets
of gold on the wainscoting (Ke., Zoe., Bn.). — And the weight of
the nails was one shekel for fifty shekels of gold*]. Thus read after
a slight correction of the Heb. text underlying (I (v. i.). — Upper
m. 1-17.] ARCHITECTURE OF THE TEMPLE 327
chambers], not mentioned elsewhere in the description of the
Temple in 2 Ch., but in i Ch. 28" (q. v.).
8. DT-ipn v-\p rT'j nx]. In i K. the term is iian, the hindmost cham-
ber, 1 K. 65- 16. '<«'•, also in 2 Ch. 3I6 42" from i K. 7" and 2 Ch. 5' «
from I K. 86- ». D>B'^|-'^ irip also appears in i K 6'6 S^ (as glosses SBOT.)
7*° (a late Dtic. passage). — 9. anr d^ii'DH oiSpf'? nncDDS Sptrci] and
the weight of the nails fifty shekels of gold, i.e., a little less than two
pounds (avoirdupois) of nails served to hold over thirty-two tons {v. s.)
of gold in place. This is clearly impossible, and it is doubtful whether
even the Chronicler would make such a careless statement. (& adds o\ki]
ToO €v6s after 'dd^, thus making each nail weigh nearly two pounds; so
also 15. This equally difficult reading (two-pound nailsl) no doubt goes
back to a Heb. original, inN Sprc, which is probably a corruption of
ins SptS' (note '^pii'D a corruption for Spr in 2 S. 21", v. BDB.). Hence
we render, and the weight of the nails was one shekel for fifty shekels of
gold {i.e., for one miiia), which gives a proper proportion and one which
any writer might propose.
10-14. The cherubim. — Abridged from i K. 6"-28. — 10. And
he made in the most holy room two cherubim, woodwork,* and he*
covered them with gold], a combination of i K. 6"" and ^^ In
I K. 6" the wood is olive. — 11. And the wings of the cherubim in
their length were twenty cubits]. Each wing extended five cubits,
and since they stood across the holy place with wing tips against
the wall and with tips touching one another, their combined length
was twenty cubits, the breadth of the room. The remainder of
the verse carries out this description. — 12. This verse describing
the position of the other cherub shows that the position of the two
cherubim side by side was identical. The Chronicler has omitted
from I K. 6^6 the height of the cherubim, ten cubits, and their iden-
tity of form (i K. 6'^^). — 13. And their faces toward the house] i.e.,
toward the holy place. They had clearly only single faces and
not the composite ones of Ezekiel's cherubim. — 14. The veil be-
tween the holy place and the most holy is not mentioned in i K.,
nor is such a veil described in Ezekiel's Temple. However,
Zerubbabel's Temple probably had it, though this is not certain.
The Chronicler derived the description either from the Temple
of his day or from the veil of the tabernacle Ex. 26" (see DB. iv.
p. 847). On the colours cj. 2'.
328 2 CHRONICLES
10. Ci'Si'i:] OTT. images BDB. with nryo image work, TS opere
slatuario sculpture work (Kc), some special form of sculpture (Be.,
Kau.). Since i K. 6^3 has ]?;ii' ■'Xj? (preferred here by Oe.), it is better to
follow (& ?| !^\i\Q)v and read O'sya (Bn.) of wood. — idsm] read after i K. 62'
and <& the sing. — 11. After inN.n (gi- has 3nD, which Bn. would supply
according to the parallel in v. '2. The npD and JJ^JC should change
places, the masc. form, as in v. '-, appearing by the attraction of the
nearer noun Jnjn. — 12. This verse is wanting in (&^ and may be a
dittography of the preceding, but more likely the verse was lost from the
Vatican text by horaoeoteleuton, a common error in this MS. — 13.
Since iJ'ia is used transitively (i Ch. 2818 2 Ch. 5' i K. 8") either ^dj3 is
to be struck out (Be.) or D'-iins is to be read (Bn.); Ki. BH. retains the
text. V. '3a reads like a gloss. Compared with i K., especially if we
omit V. 12 and v. ''a, we have a beautifully compact and intelligible
description, showing skilful abridgment.
15-17. The two pillars before the Temple. — Abridged from
r K. 7'5-22, cf. Je. 52='. The Chronicler has omitted in his descrip-
tion their metal, brass; their circumference, twelve cubits (i K.
7'5); the checkerwork of the capitals (i K. 7"), and the lilywork
surmounting the capitals (i K. 7'3- "). — 15. Two pillars]. Cf. v. ".
— Thirty-Jive cubits in height]. In i K. 71^ 2 K. 25'' Je. 52^1 the
height of the pillars is given as eighteen cubits; thirty-five are only
mentioned here and in Ci> of Je. 52='. This latter dimension has
been explained as representing the double length of the two pillars,
assuming that each was about seventeen and a half cubits long
(Mov. p. 253), or as a reckoning including the five cubits of the
capital and other additions in their construction (Ew. Hist. III. p.
237), or as a misreading of the numerical sign TV* (eighteen) for nh
(thirty-five) (Ke., Zoe., Oe.) (to be rejected because we have no evi-
dence of the use of such signs in ancient Hebrew and thus OT. writ-
ing), or, which is the most probable, as a corruption arising from the
text of Kings (n'lli'y H^Dw' riwlli) becoming illegible in some way
and thus read "|-iS* '0t2^^ W^h'C! (Be.) or something similar (Bn.).
Possibly the Chronicler read a text of i K. 7'^ in which ^C, com-
passed about, had become illegible (or corrupted to ClD"*, added), in
which case he would have interpreted the twelve cubits of circum-
ference as an addition to the height; hence his 35 = 18 + 12-1-5
(capital). From the description given in i K. 7'5-2i (with v. '^
m. 1-17.] ARCHITECTURE OF THE TEMPLE 329
corrected from Jc. 52-'') and omitted by the Chronicler (although
a partial description appears in 4'^'"), they were hollow bronze
pillars four finger-breadths in thickness, eighteen cubits (about 30
ft.) in height, and twelve cubits (about 20 ft.) in circumference.
Each was surmounted (i) by a molten chapiter or capital five
cubits in height, which (2) was covered with a bronze network,
and (3) over the network hung two chains in four loops (Je. 52='')
of 100 pomegranates each (v. '«). Each capital either curved
outward at the top in a lily shape or was surmounted by a lily-
shaped ornament (Bn., Sk.; Bur. rejects the lily shape alto-
gether).— 16. And he made chains like a necklace*]. The read-
ing in the oracle (^, RV., etc.) in this description of the pillars is
clearly wrong. The slightest change in Hebrew letters of similar form
(T'3"lD instead of "l"'m3) gives the reading above (Bn.; T^^l^ in-
stead of "l''2f3 on a ring, on the edge Be., Ki.). Around the ball-
shaped or rounded cup-shaped capitals of the pillars were strung
chains upon which the metallic pomegranates were hung, according
to I K. 72" apparently two rows of 100 pomiCgranates each. — 17. Cf.
I K. 72'. These two pillars were either a part of the porch support-
ing a lintel (a view based largely on Ez. 40^', Now. Arch. II. p. 2^),
or, better, free on either side before the porch (as is suggested by
V. '^ and this verse). These pillars were in Solomon's Temple be-
cause they were a usual feature of Semitic temples, symbols of the
deity, a survival in this form of the ancient stone pillars the Maz-
zcboth (cf. 14=) (Bn. EBi. IV. col. 493; WRS. Rel. Sent. p. 208).
(The bowls, fitting receptacles for sacrificial fat, on the tops
also suggested to WRS. that they might have served as altars
or candlesticks, op. cit. pp. 488/.). — Jachin means "he will es-
tablish," "the Stablisher," an appropriate name for Yahweh.
The meaning of Boaz is not so clear. It is usually rendered
" In him is strength," which would be a suitable appellation of
Yahweh.
15. nsxni] and the plated capital air, see BDB. Its use is guar-
anteed by the Aram. npds. I K. 7"= has niPD. — 16. 1013] in the
oracle, possibly a gloss from i K. 62' (Ba.), but more likely a corruption
of T3-I (with prep.) necklace Gn. 41" Ez. 16". &, A, construed the chains
as fifty cubits in length, extending thus from the most holy place through
■,.Q 2 CHRONICLES
the holy place (forty cubits) and the porch (ten cubits). — 17. rpa] per-
haps originally ly'^i'a " Baal of strength, " and then since Baal had
become opprobrious as a name of Yahweh, the author of i K. made
this contraction (Klo.).
IV-V. I. The Furniture of the Temple.
I. The altar. — This altar of bronze is not given among the fur-
niture of the Temple described in i K., although mentioned in
I K. 8«^ 2 K. i6'^''-; and an altar which Solomon built is also men-
tioned I K. 9".
According to We. (Prol. p. 44, n. i) and Bn. {Kom. on i and 2 K. p.
47, EBi. IV. col. 4937) a description of the altar stood in the original
text of I K. and thus supplied the Chronicler with his information, but
later was struck out of i K. by an editor (R'') on the theory that the
brazen altar of the Tabernacle had been preserved and was set up in
the court of the Temple. But in that case some trace of the missing
passage would be expected in the (&^ text of i K., but there is none
(Bur. p. 102). The failure of the altar to appear among the furniture
has been also explained on the ground that the two pillars as receptacles
for the sacrificial fat served for altars {v. s. 3'" WRS.). But this is very
improbable. More likely Solomon used the bare rock for his sacrifice —
the great rock es Sakhra now under the dome of the Mosque of Omar,
which is believed to have stood in front of the Temple and has every
indication of having been an altar {DB. IV. p. 696) (Sk. i K. 8"). The
reference then to the brazen altar in i K. 8" may be a late addition, and
the earliest reliable mention would be in the story of Ahaz, 2 K. i6'<
(GAS. J. pp. 64 /.). The question remains, however, how came the
brazen altar of Ahaz if not built by Solomon.
In form, accepting the measurements of the Chronicler, the altar
was probably like that of Ezekiel's Temple (43'^-"), i.e., a series of
terraces culminating in a broad plateau or table. The base then
would have been twenty by twenty cubits. If the dimensions given
by Hecataeus (in Jos. Apion, I. 22) are correct, the Chronicler
doubtless took his figures from the altar of Zerubbabel's Temple,
i.e., the Temple of his day. The latter was made of unhewn
stone.
2-6. The brazen sea and the lavers. — The description of the
sea is taken directly from i K. 7"". This was a huge cylindrical or
hemispherical tank resting on the backs of twelve oxen facing out-
ward, three each toward the four cardinal points of the compass.
IV. 1-V. 1.] FURNITURE OF THE TEMPLE 231
The tank stood in the southeast angle of the court. — 2. Molten sea\
The casting of such an immense article of metalwork in one piece
has been questioned; and it has even been suggested that the tank
was wooden and, since the ancients preferred hammered work,
plated with bronze (Bn. EBi. IV. col. 4340). The name sea, ac-
cording to Josephus, was given from its size {Ant. viii. 3, 5),
but it may also be connected with the symbolical character of
the basin. — Ten cubits from brim to brim] i.e., in diameter. The
numbers of this verse are only approximate, since 10 cubits (17.22
ft.) in diameter would give a circumference of 31.4159 cubits
instead of 30 cubits (51.66 ft.). — 3. And under its brim were
gourd-like knops encompassing it round about {ten in a cubit?)
encircling the sea round about. In two rows were the gourd-like
knops, cast when it was cast^]. Whether this encircling garland-
like ornamentation was of the fruit or the flowers of the gourd
is uncertain. — 5. This verse in (&^^ of i K., lacking, however,
the statement of the capacity of the tank, precedes v. *. This
is the natural order. — Three thousand baths], i K. 7^^ "two thou-
sand baths." Both estimates appear too large, since at the
sm-aller figure, reckoning a bath at 65 pints {DB. IV. p. 912) or
at 64.04 pints {EBi. IV. col. 5997), the capacity would have been
16,250 or 16,010 gallons, but the dimensions 10 cubits in diam-
eter, 30 in circumference, and 5 in depth in a cylinder give only
10,798 gallons (figuring with the long cubit, 20.67 '^^-i we obtain
about 15,000 cubits), and if a hemisphere 6,376 gallons {EBi. IV.
col. 4340). The true capacity was probably somewhere between
these figures. — 6. The full description of the bases of the ten lavers
and also their size, given in i K. 727-39^ js omitted by the Chronicler.
— To wash in them]. This is the Chronicler's interpretation of the
use both of the sea and the lavers. But they were ill adapted for
the purpose of cleansing, especially the sea, unless it was a recep-
tacle from which water was drawn, although it received this mean-
ing in the furniture of the tabernacle (Ex. 3o>8-"). Both the sea
and the lavers probably had a symbolical meaning (an interpreta-
tion now generally adopted). The sea represented the waters or the
flood upon which Yahweh as the God of rain was enthroned (Ps.
29'"), or the primeval flood or deep over which his creative power
332
2 CHRONICLES
was manifested {cf. Gn. i^ «• » Ps. 24^ 93^). The lavers with their
wheels and decorations of cherubim (i K. 729 tt.) y\o\. inappropri-
ately might then symbolise the clouds {cf. the cherubim of Ezekiel
and cherub of the storm upon which Yahweh rode (Ps. 18" *"")).
The bulls probably also were symbols of deity; cf. the calf of the
wilderness (Ex. 32'=) and those set up at Bethel and Dan (i K.
12"'-).
2. '^n] 2 K. 723 1;'. — 3. mm] wanting in i K. 7=^. — o^'ipa] oxen; i K.
D''i'pDi, laiops {gourds), the true reading although (6 and B have that of ^.
The change to oxen was made by some ignorant copyist who thought the
oxen were here mentioned. — iS] i K. i.now'S, needed for clearness of
meaning. — 3^3D-] wanting in K. and (S. — ncNa '\Z'y\ ten in a cubit (Be.,
RVm.), is grammatically inadmissible. The phrase means for ten
cubits (U, ^, ®), which is meaningless, since the gourds ran around the
tank for thirty cubits, hence probably a gloss in i K. by some one who
mistook the diameter for the circumference (St. SBOT., so essentially
Bur.)- — 3"JD a^n DN □'•D^pc] is wanting in (&^ of i K., and may be re-
garded there as a gloss (Bn.). — 0''jc] i K. "'J-'. — ip^'i] i K. D''j?pfln. —
To fit the oxen misread for knops (gourds) in this verse with the following
verse 05'' has S^o y^vrj ^xt6j'ei;<rai' roiis fibffx^^^ ^f '''V X'^^^"'^'' o-^t^v m>
ri eiroiij(Tav avroiis dddeKa fj.6<rxovs. (B^ agrees with ll|. — 5. DV"i3 pnriD
S'Di d-'dSn rt'"'-'] I K. 7=5 '^i3'' r\2 q^dSs. Sioi in Ch., superfluous after
P'inn, is due to a glossator familiar with i K. (Be., Oe., Ki.), or simple
pleonasm (Ke., Zoe.). Bn. would strike out either p''rna or h^D\ (S has
Ktti ^ferAeo'ex', i.e., Sdm.
7 f. The candlesticks, tables, and basins. — The candlesticks
(lampstands) are not mentioned in i K. among the regular furni-
ture of the Temple, but only incidentally in the summary of golden
articles (i K. 7"), a passage recognised as of late origin (St. SBOT.,
Bur.). They do not appear also among the spoil of 2 K. 25'3-i7,
and thus their appearance in the parallel Je. 52 "is a gloss. Hence,
ten candlesticks, though regarded as historic by Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.,
Ba., et al., are probably an imaginary product. Some light, doubt-
less, was in the Temple (cf. 1 S. 3'), very likely one lampstand, pos-
sibly not unlike that of the second Temple and the tabernacle
(cf. the vision of Zechariah c. 4, Ex. 25^'=), but if elaborate its
omission from the earliest list of Temple furniture is singular.
On the other hand it is urged: "There must have been some ground
for the tradition of ten lampstands. Probably these did e.xist — but
IV. 1-V. 1.] FURNITURE OF THE TEMPLE
333
brazen, not golden ones, in Solomon's Temple, or they were added soon
after, for there must have been some way of lighting the interior of the
house. They would be kept burning day and night, as house lamps in
the East are at the present day. They might have been put on pedestals
— the Eastern fashion — but most likely they were set on the ten tables
about which we read in 2 Ch. 4^ " (W. T. Davies, DB. IV. p. 701).
7. Cy. V. -" I K. 7^^ — According to the prescription concerning
them] i.e., the prescription in reference to their structure (cf. Ex.
2^31-37 ^yi7 n.y — jfi iiie te?nple] (^^TI), the holy place; according to
I K. 7*' they were before the most holy place. Their exact position
in the room, if there, cannot be determined; probably they extended
down its sides. — 8. Ten tables]. Since elsewhere only one table is
mentioned for the shew-bread in the Temple (13" 29>« i K. 6^"
7^«), likewise alsoinEzekiel's Temple (41" f- altar=table), and since
the position of these tables was the same as that of the ten candle-
sticks (v. '), these ten tables have been held to have been for the
support of the ten candlesticks (Be., Zoe.,Bn., EBi.). In the mind
of the writer, however, they were doubtless for the shew-bread and
in reality an exaggeration like the ten lampstands {cf. v. '' i Ch.
28'«). (Ke. held for the shew-bread; Oe. uncertain, perhaps
for both; Ba. not for the shew-bread.). — A hundred basins of gold],
not mentioned in i K. except generally (i K. y^"); their use is un-
certain, probably for receiving and sprinkling the sacrificial
blood (Be., Ba.) or for pouring libations (cf. Am. 6«) (Ke., Zoe., Oe.).
9. The courts of the Temple. — These are described according
to the arrangement at the time of the Chronicler, when, under the
influence of Ezekiel, there was an inner court restricted for the use
of the priests and an outer one for the people. The inner court men-
tioned in I K. 6^6 712 is the court of the Temple, while the great
outer court (i K. 7 '2) was the court extending around all of Solo-
mon's buildings (cf. GAS. /. ii. p. 256). The term here used for
the great outer court (nlTy) occurs only in i and 2 Ch. and Ez.
The doors are not mentioned in i K.
10-18. The position of the brazen sea and the works of
Hiram. — Taken directly from i K. j^^^-tT, which explains the awk-
ward introduction here of the statement respecting the place of
the sea. — 11. The pots], for boiUng flesh, an ancient way of
334 2 CHRONICLES
preparing sacrificial food (c/. i S. 2'"). — Shovels] utensils for
cleaning the altar (Ex. 27'). — Basins], used for catching the
blood and throwing it against the altar ((/. v. »). — 12. The two
pillars]. Cf. 3'^-". — The two howls of the capitals which were
on the pillars'^]. The tops of the pillars were either open and
cup-like, or ball-like and closed. The absence of the mention
here of any additional lilywork favours its rejection {cf. view of
Bur. 3'^). — 13. And the four hundred pomegranates, etc.]. Cf.
noteson3•'^— 14. C/.v.«.— 15. C/.v.^— 16. Cf v. 'K— The flesh
hooks] (RV.) i.e., sacrificial forks {v. i.). — 17. In the plain of the
Jordan], lit. in the oval (valley) of the Jordan. — Succoth and
Zeredah]. The latter of these names is the Chronicler's equiva-
lent of "Zarethan" of the text of i K. (7^^), also mentioned as
near the city Adam (Jos. 3'^). This is probably the mod. ed
Damieh on the west bank of the Jordan, twenty-four miles from
its mouth. Succoth on the east bank is usually identified with Tell
Deir 'Alia, about one mile north of the Jabbok (GAS. HGHL.
p. 585). — Instead of in the clay ground, etc., the passage probably
in I K. originally read, at the ford of Adamah, etc. (v. i.).
10. 7 MSB., (&, I K. 739 after in^:: have n^an, which may be supplied
here (Bn.). Retaining the present text of Ch. n'':D^n is an example of an
adj. used nominally (Dav. Syn. § 32, R. 5). — n2Jj] i K. 3jj. — 11.
mini and 2]. Since this same man is mentioned in v. " and 2'-, Ki. reads
ON o-\in (SBOT.), yet probably the Chronicler followed the text of
I K. — nn'On] i K. 7^" nnon. Text of Ch. is the original (so
Th., St., Klo., Kamp., Bn., Ki., Bur., on i K. 710).— a^nSxn ^^22]
I K. nini n^a. — 12. nnnani mSjni] i K. 7^' mPDn nSji without doubt the
true reading (adopted by Be., Kau., Bn., Ki. Kom., BH.). ®^ Kal
iir'avTwv 7ajXd^ ry x'^^apf^- ^^ follows % — 13. 'iJi DIDd'^] in i K.
7^2^ but to be omitted there as a dittography from previous verse {SBOT.
of K., Ki. BH. of K.); the Chronicler reproduced the error of K. —
>JD Sy] in I K. should be ':'^' S;, (B^, or anic^n k'ni Sj?, as in v. '^
(Bn., Ki., Bur.), but the Chronicler probably found the error already
in I K. — 14. nafj? ' and =] i K. 7" itJ'j! and ma^y the true reading, and the
ten bases and the ten lavers upon the bases (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau.,
Ba., Bn., Ki.). — 15. nns] art. to be supplied as in i K. 7". — vnnn]
I K. DM nnn. — 16. nuSran] sacrificial forks, cf. Ex. 27^ 38' Nu. 4'^
I Ch. 28" t> I K. 7" nipitD " bowls." The reading of K. is preferred by
Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki., while Bn. rightly considers that of Ch. (retained by
Kau.) the more original, since basins have already been mentioned in
IV. 1-V. 1.] FURNITURE OF THE TEMPLE 335
I K. 7". — ani^D So PNi] I K. iw'S Shnh o^'^^n hj nxi, Qr. nSsn instead
of Shnh, which latter gives the true reading (see Bur.)- Be., Ke., Oe.,
prefer nS^n diSd.i '73 pni as the true reading in Ch. Kau., Bn., Ki., ad-
here to the present text as the Chronicler's reconstruction of the corrupt
text of I K. This latter is quite likely. — rm'^Zf i'?d'? V3N Q-\in] Huram,
the trusted counsellor oj King Solomon; v. s. on 2"^, and on construction
cf. Koe. iii. pp. 256/. — pnc] a word appearing in NH.; i K. oidd. — 17.
Oy'^] I K. 7^^ n3>'C3. (6 in each iv tGj wdxet, H in terra argillosa, hence
RV. in the clay ground. Be. thought of the hardened earth prepared to
receive the molten metal, the clay moulds, a rendering followed by Oe.,
Kau., Ki., but Moore on Ju. y-^ followed by BDB., Bn., emends to
nsis m3j?C3 at the crossing of Adamah, regarding Adamah as identical
with DIN Jos. 3'^ which is there said to be near jms. — nn-nx] i K. j.-ni".^
18. c;n] (the original according to Bn.) i K. 7^7 nri. — 3iS] i K. 2-\^. —
iws:;] repeated in i K. — •''3] wanting in i K. Its introduction gives a
slightly different force to the sentence. In K. the meaning is that the
vessels were too numerous to be weighed, in Ch. that the number was
very great because no regard was had to the amount (weight) of brass
used. The present text of i K. is harsh and probably not the original.
19-22. The golden furniture of the Temple. — Taken from
I K. 7^8-^".
This passage in i K. has been regarded as a late addition to the origi-
nal account of the Temple furniture, for the following reasons: (i) the
improbability of such lavish expenditure on articles like hinges, etc.;
(2) the mention of a golden altar of which there is no historical evidence
in pre-exilic times; (3) a discrepancy between the reference to the cedar
altar for the shew-bread in i K. 6-" and the reference in i K. 7" to the
table of gold; and also all the articles mentioned should naturally have
been given along with the cherubim and table (altar) of cedar, in c. 6;
(4) the mere enumeration of the articles, when the brazen furniture
is so elaborately described, points in the same direction (Bn., Sk.).
The Chronicler has tables (v. »«) instead of sing, to conform with
I Ch. 28'« and probably with v.', and the doors of the two rooms
are of gold (v.") instead of the hinges (i K. 75°) (but v. i.). For
brevity, also, the Chronicler has omitted the position of the golden
candlesticks (v. 2" compared with i K. 7<'). — 19. The golden altar].
This appears later in the altar of incense of the tabernacle (Ex.
30'^), but it is lacking in the Temple of Ezekiel, and probably
had no place in Solomon's Temple (DB. II. p. 467). — The tables],
336 2 CHRONICLES
in I K. 7*« "the table." The Chronicler has plurahsed to conform
with V. « q. v.— 20. And the candlesticks] the lampstands (r/. v. ■).
— According to the prescript io7i]. Cf. v. '. The reference here is not
to their form, but their use. 21. And the flowers] the flower-hke
ornaments of the stands on which the lamps rested (cf. Ex. 25"»).
22. The snuffers, etc.] the utensils for the care of the lamps and
of the golden altar of incense. — And the hinges of the temple of the
inner doors of the most holy place and of the doors of the temple, that
is the temple room (the holy place), were of gold'^]. This is the true
reading (v. i.). The corrupt text makes the entire doors plated
with gold. According to i K. 6^' '• the doors were of olive wood,
overlaid with gold.
19. The original of i K. 7'^ may have been and Solomon placed (njM)
all the vessels which he had made {p~''j) in the house of Yahweh (Bn.).
SBOT. has still a different text; but our present te.xt of i K. was before
the Chronicler.— 3vn^N-i] i K. nin\— 3n>Syi pun^rn pni] i K. 1w>n \rh-c'n pni
v^;.— At the end of the verse i K. hasanr.— 20. After nnjcn hni i K. 7"
ha.sjive on the right hand and five on tlie left and lacks asrso DijJjS Dn\-nji.
— 3n;?3S] in order that they should burn. — 21. 2n; n^3-3 Nin] probably a
gloss, since wanting in i K. 7'^ and also (B. ni'^32 av. — 22. i K. 7" has
niaoni, " the cups," before rnsrcni. — rir::'jon vnir'^T ron nnsi] i K.
■•n'jDn r\^2n mnSiS mnoni. Hence read ^v^ viSiSi nn 'S-i^ n'3n nnDi as
the most probable original of Ch. (Be., Zoe., Oe., Ki., Bn.). Ke. de-
fends n.^D and as regards the opening (door) of the house its door leaves,
etc., followed essentially by Kau., RV. Accepting this, the Chronicler
thought of the entire doors as plated with gold.
V. 1. The completion of the furnishing of the Temple. — A
copy of I K. 7*'. — 1. The tilings that David his father had dedicated].
Although this statement is in i K. 7^', the books of i and 2 S. and
I and 2 K. contain no record of such dedication by David before-
hand of utensils directly made with the Temple in view. It has,
therefore, been thought that the word vessels (utensils) might, after
its common meaning, include weapons and thus the spoil of war
which David did dedicate to Yahweh {cf i Ch. i8'» 2 S. S'^ )
(Sk.).
V. 1. nrr] eleven Mss., 1 K. 7^1 + I'^cn.— n^a"^] i K. n\n. — pnm] read
after i K., (6^^, &, U, pn. The waw has been drawn from V3N. — Sa]
wanting in eighteen MSS., 0»^^, #, i K. (Ki. BH.\.
V. 2-14.] REMOVAL OF ARK INTO THE TEMPLE 337
V. 2- VII. 10. The Dedication of the lemple.
V. 2-14. The bringing of the ark. — A copy of i K. 8'-" with
the addition of a notice of the priests and the Levites and their
musical service (vv. iib-i3a)_ jn i K. this section represents an old
narrative revised especially by a priesdy editor. — 2. Tlien] i.e.,
after the completion of the Temple and all its furniture. — Even all
the heads of the tribes, the princes of the fathers' houses] a true
description of the elders.— Zion]. Cf i Ch. 15'.— 3. At the Feast]
the Feast of Tabernacles, the harvest festival at the close of the
ingathering of fruit crops. — In the seventh month]. Nothing in
the narrative of the Chronicler is at variance with this. In i K.
it must be reconciled with the statement that the Temple was
finished in the eighth month (i K. 6=^). The building may have
been finished earlier than the utensils; hence the dedication may
have been in the next year (Sk.). — 4. And the Levites took up
the ark]. According to 2 K. 8^, the Chronicler's source, the
priests took up the ark. This reflects the older usage {cf Jos.
•^3.6 66- 12 8'' (JE.). The Chronicler changed priests into Levites
to bring the action into conformity with the regulation of P
which assigned the duty of bearing the ark to the Levites (Nu.
3" 4'5); yet in v. ^ he allowed the double expression, the priests
the Levites, to stand, possibly because certain utensils might well
have been borne by the priests, and in v.' the word priests
was properly retained (from 2 K. 8^), since when the Temple
was reached only the priests could lawfully place the ark in
the holy of holies (cf. Nu. 4^ ^■). — 5. The tent of meeting and
all the holy utensils that were in the tent], the Mosaic taber-
nacle and all its furniture, which, according to the Chronicler,
was at Gibeon (2 Ch. i^ f); or the tent David erected for the ark
(2 S. 6" I Ch. 15') (Be.). The former was without question
in the mind of the priestly editor of i K. who inserted this ref-
erence, and also this was the view of the Chronicler. The term
tent of meeting is only used of the tabernacle. — 6. Sacrificing
before the ark]. Cf. the numerous sacrifices by stages when
David brought up the ark (2 S. 6'3).— 7. Cf. v.^— 8. The exact
position of the ark under the cherubim is carefully defined. —
9. And the staves were long so that the ends of the staves were seen
22
^^8 2 CHRONICLES
from the holy placed before the oracle]. One standing in the holy
place could see in the darkness of the most holy place the pro-
jecting ends of the staves by which the ark was carried. — But they
were not seen without]. But one outside of the holy place could not
see them. So generally; t'. i. Thisisbetter than the interpretation:
"But did not extend beyond the door" (Sk.). — And thete they are*
unto this day]. The retention of this clause from i K. 8« is an ex-
ample of the Chronicler's unconcern at times to harmonise his text
with actual conditions, since the ark and its staves had been long
since destroyed. — 10. Now there was nothing in the ark except
the two tables]. The form of expression implies that other things
besides the two tables might have been expected in the ark. A late
Jewish tradition placed within the ark a golden pot of manna and
Aaron's rod (Heb. 9*). A modern view is that the ark contained
one or two sacred stones (St. Gesch. I. pp. 457/.; Now. Arch. II.
pp. 5/.; TKC. EBi. I. col. 307), "a fetish" in which Yahweh dwelt
(Sm. Hist. p. 71). But if ISIoses gave laws to Israel and brought
the people into covenant relation to Yahweh, then two stone tablets
containing the ten words are reasonably the historic contents of the
ark {DB. I. p. 151). — Horeb] the mount of Yahweh's revelation
in the wilderness, in E followed by D, while Sinai in J followed by
P. — 11. And it came to pass when the priests had come ont of the holy
place]. This statement from i K. (S'"") and continued in the words
of v.'^'', that then the house was filed with a cloud, even the house of
Yahweh (i K. 8^"^), is interrupted by the Chronicler with the inter-
vening \-\'. nb.i3a_ xhe Chronicler expands the allusion to the
priests (i) by mentioning how all the priests took part in the ser-
vice and not simply those to whom in course the service might
have fallen (v. '"'); (2) by describing the musical service at the con-
clusion of which the house was filled with the cloud of Yahweh
(vv. '2-'3a)_ — Now all the priests who were at hand had sanctified
themselves without keeping (their) courses]. Ordinarily the priests
served in turn in twenty-four divisions (i Ch. 24'^), but on this oc-
casion all officiated without reference to their turn. This was the
custom at the three great annual festivals (Schiir. Gesch. pp. 279
/.). — 12. And the Levites, who were singers all of them]. In a similar
manner with the priests, all the Levitical singers, who ordinarily
V. 2-14.] REMOVAL OF ARK INTO THE TEMPLE 339
served in turn in twenty-four courses (i Ch. 253-3'), took part in the
dedication. — Asaph, Heman, and JudutJnm] the leaders or the
representatives of the three Levitical choirs (cf. 1 Ch. 6'^^- "'«•)
15" 25'-"). — With cymbals, psalteries, and Jiarps], Cf. i Ch. i5'«. —
A hundred and twenty priests sounding with the trmnpets]. The
blowing of the trumpets was a duty of the priests. The hazozerah
was the priestly instrument par excellence (DB. iv. p. 816). The
one hundred and twenty represent five taken from each of the
twenty-four divisions. — 13 f. And it came to pass when, as one
person, even the trumpeters and the singers were causing one sound to
he heard to praise and to give thanks unto Yahweh, and when they
raised a sound with trumpets and with cymbals and with the instru-
ments of song and when they praised Yahweh, saying. For he is
good; for his loving kindness endureth forever : then the house was
full of the cloud, the house of Yahweh]. The Chronicler introduces
the appearance of the cloud coincident with a great burst of
music and praise, while the simpler narrative of i K. presents
more clearly the thought that, when the ark had been placed in
the holy of holies, the cloud filled the holy place, as visible token
that Yahweh had taken up his abode in the new Temple.
2. h>r\^)] I K. S' '^rr'.— After Sn and before D'^Stim^ i K. has
r\G^-^ ihizn wanting in ® of i K. and hence a gloss. — 3. i K. 8^ has nc'^^'
(a gloss) after "l^nn; and D'jnNn nno before Jn3 omitted by the Chron-
icler because in his day the old Canaanite names of the months had long
since been dropped and numbers were used in their place. That is the
seventh month is an addition to the original text of K. {SBOT., Bur.).
Kau. holds the text of K. the true one for Ch. Certainly the retention of
ihat is the seventh month is awkward without the retention of Ethanim,
but such awkwardness of the Chronicler is not unknown elsewhere
{cf. I Ch. i4< "in Jerusalem "). — 4. dmS.i] 1 K. 8^ n^jn^n. — 5. jn.sn]
I K. 84 + nin\— iSyn] i K. iSy^.— DM':'n] i K. □^I'-.n also (&, 15, S>. The
omission of the 1 is perhaps due to a copyist (Ke., Zoe., Bn., Ki.).
Since iSy.n is in Ch., it is probable that v. ^^, recognised as a gloss in i
K. 8^ (St. SBOT., from R.^, Bur., since wanting in ^^^), was introduced
into I K. from Ch. (Bn., Ki.). Yet dmSh D''jn3n appears also in 23' s
30"; and it is doubtful whether the Chronicler and his readers
through their familiarity with Deuteronomy laid any stress upon pre-
cision of statement in the use of the phrase the priests the Levites ; the
two classes were perfectly distinct in their own mind, as much so as if
the conjunction and had been used between them. — 6. vSy] i K. 8^ -f-
340 2 CHRONICLES
1PK. — 7. D^jnan] cf. v. K Here the Chronicler retains the priests.
— 8. 'di vnn] I K. 8' 'on '3.— iddm] i K. iid^i. Be., Ke., preferred
the latter as the original after i Ch. 28'8 Ex. 2520 379, but Bn. regards the
former as the original in i K. on the basis of 05 irfpieKdXvirTov. This
is uncertain, since TreptKaXi/n-Tw is not used elsewhere to render either
verb (Trom. Concord.). — 9. jnxn jc] copyist error; yet possibly an
intentional, though clumsy, change of the Chronicler, who did not wish to
think, of the ark as visible from the holy place, cf. 3". It is generally
read after i K. 8^, (S^ and some Heb. MSS. znpn p (Be., Ke., Zoe., Ki.,
Bn.). Other emendations: oipn Klo., Dipnn Kamp. (B^ combines
both readings. — ''Hm] copyist error for vnn, the text of i K. and OS
(Be., Ki.).^10. rm'^n] i K. 8' a>j3Nn nm':'. — j.-'j] i K. nn + or. —
After ain both here and in i K., Bn. and Ki., following (^ in K., supply
iT'ian Pin'?; but while without them the construction is awkward, it
does not seem necessary to supply them (Bur.). SBOT. on K. regards
'IJ1 ms ns'N, owing to the lack of connection, as a gloss. — a>"<S':::] i K.
Dnxo y^nr::. — 11. ^d] here introduces an explanatory clause descriptive
of the priests. — mae''? pN] Ges. § 114&; Dav. Syn. §§ 94, 95 {h). —
12. an'nvs'?! . . . aSs'^] S of specification, even. — .■^njoi] governed by
preposition with previous word, cf. Ges. § iighh; Dav. Syn. § loi. —
D''"»c>] to be taken as the predicate. — 13. ^n^'i] properly a resumption of
iH'i in V. ". — onsxnnS] ^, and with following word, of specification
to wit or even. — yrrmS] Ges. § 1141. — ^hn*-'] S of purpose. — onn^ and
SSnn] appear correlative with y^cJi'n'?. — nSd r>3ni] the7t the house was
filled, cf. Dr. TH. § 128, i K. S'" with sam.e construction, n'^o ]y;^^
ni.T' n>3 PN. Ki. after (&^ reads ri}7\-> 1133 ]iy nSo non. Be., Kau., re-
gard mn^ -■'2 as a gloss, explanatory of n''2n and introduced from K.
Bn., on the other hand, regards the text of Ch. as a correction from K.
of one who held n'?3 to be intransitive. — 14. D''n'7.N-i] i K. S" nin\
VI. 1-42. Solomon's address to the people and dedica-
tory prayer. — Taken (save vv. "■ ^1 <■) with almost no variation
from I K. 8'=-5i"'. In the addition in v. '^ is given an interpretation of
the statement that Solomon stood before the altar (v. '-) (before which
properly it was lawful only for the priests to stand). The interpre-
tation shows that he did not really stand before the altar, but upon
some sort of a brazen improvised pulpit not mentioned elsewhere.
In yv. ^' '• a new and by far more beautiful conclusion is given to the
prayer, taking the place of i K. 8" (v." and portions of \^'. ^''^ "
are also omitted).
1-3. Introduction. — 1. Yahweh hath promised to dicell in thick
darkness (cloud)] either a reference to the cloud which had filled
VI. 1-11.] SOLOMON'S ADDRESS 34I
the Temple indicating that Yahweh had taken up his abode in the
newly built Temple (Be.); or to be understood through the missing
line (y. i.) The sun hath Yahweh set in the heavens. The passage
then means that Yahweh, instead of confining himself to the realms
of light, or in contrast to the realms of light, which are subordinate
to him, dwells in the thick darkness or cloud, and hence says
Solomon, I have built him a Temple whose dark inner shrine may
fitly serve as his dwelling-place. — 2. Biit\ This antithesis arises
from the Chronicler's change of the text {y. i.). The change is un-
fortunate. It emphasises Solomon's building of the Temple in-
stead of the fact that the Temple had been built agreeably to the
nature of God, which seems to be the meaning of i K. S^\ which
reads / have surely built thee a lofty mansion. — And] wanting in
I K. (v. i.).— 3. And the king turned his face about]. The writer
thought of the previous words uttered by Solomon, with his face
toward the Temple and his back to the assembled people, whom
he now blessed and addressed. In i K. these words mark the be-
ginning of the Deuteronomic section, embracing the speech and
prayer of Solomon.
1. These w. "• appear in C5 of i K. after 8"-" with the following
additional words D^na'3 pDn cvy, which furnish the additional Hne
(v. s.) which is incorporated into the text of i K. as original by We., Ki.,
Bn., Bur., Sk., et al, but M. is adhered to as the original by St. SBOT.
except -\cxn instead of isn. M was the text of the Chronicler. — 2.
'jNi] I K. 8'3 nj3. — poci] I K. |i33.
4-11. Solomon's address to the people. — A statement of the
reasons which led to the building of the Temple, based largely
upon 2 S. 75 ^^ — 4. And hath with his hands fulfilled it]. Yahweh
had promised the building of the Temple and had through Solo-
mon fulfilled this promise. — Saying]. The promise is now intro-
duced.— 5. Cf. for the first part 2 S. 7« i Ch. 17^. The turn, how-
ever, is different here. There the thought is that Yahweh had
only dwelt in tents and did not, therefore, care for a "house of
cedar"; here, that hitherto no place had been chosen nor yet
person to carry out his design. — That my name might be there].
Where Yahweh dwelt there was his name, a term expressive of the
divine nature and almost if not quite equivalent to person, cf. Dt.
342 2 CHRONICLES
12'- " i4« i6'- « " 262. — 6. Under David both the place and the
d}'nasty were chosen. — 7. David cherished the design of building
the Temple, but it was overruled (2 S. 7'»- i Ch. 17'°). — 9. CJ. 2
S. 7" I Ch. i7'2. — 11. Wherein is the covcTtant] i.e., the tables of
the covenant (cf. 5'").
4. VT-Ji] I K. 8'5 niai. — 5. inj:] i K. i8i« + S{<-\!i'> pn. — onxn yiNc]
I K. anxDD, cf. 5"*. — 'ji ••mna n'^i] wanting in i K. — 6. ott' . . . inaNi]
wanting in i K. and (S^ of Ch., but given in 05^ of K., which is fol-
lowed by Kau., Ki., Bn., but not by St. SB0T.—9. "2] i K. 8" dn -2.
— 11. jnNH nx] I K. 8=' ]nN'7 oipD. — Snii:" •>:2 cv] i K. iNixna ij>n3!< d;;
Qi^xD y^KD onu.
12-42. Solomon's prayer of dedication.
12-13. The position of Solomon. — 12. Before the altar] the
great altar which was in the court (cf. 4'). — And he stretched forth
his hands] the universal attitude of prayer (Ex. 9"- "). — 13.
This verse is from the Chronicler. The narrative of i K. does not
mention any structure upon which Solomon knelt, nor yet his
kneeling posture. The notion of the structure may have arisen
from the desire to remove Solomon from before the altar as a place
sacred for the priests (We. Prol. p. 186, Bn.). This view is re-
jected by Oe.
14-17. Prayer for keeping the promise to David. — Ac-
knowledged as relatively fulfilled in Solomon and the Temple
(v. '5), but a larger fulfilment is desired (v."). — 14. The incorn-
parableness of Yahweh as a covenant God is described, cf. Dt. 3"
7'. — That walk before thee with all their heart]. With such the cov-
enant is kept. — 15. As it is this day]. Solomon, David's promised
son, was reigning and the Temple, the promised house, had been
built (2 S. 7'2 f- I Ch. 17" '■).— 16. There shall not be cut off, etc.].
C/. 7'8 I K. 2< Je. ;^^''K The conditional character of this promise
is worthy of notice.
18-21. Prayer for answers at this house. — Expressing in
general terms the burden of all the following seven specific petitions
which are that Yahweh will hear (i) the oath of ordeal (v\'. " '■), (2)
prayer under defeat (vv. " '•), (3) prayer for rain (w.^s f), (4) prayer
under various calamities (vv. ^s-ai), (5) the prayer of the stranger
(w. 32 f), (6) the prayer of the army (w. '« '•), (7) prayer in cap-
VI. 12-42.] PRAYER OF DEDICATION 34^
tivity (w. s6-39)_ — 18, With menl an addition of the Chronicler;
a possible softening of the cruder conception of mere dwelling
on earth with the thought of spiritual communion. — 20. Yahweh
is conceived as being away from the Temple to which he is
asked to look day and night, and yet his name dwells in the Tem-
ple. He is both present and absent. — 21. When thou hearest, for-
give]. Every answer to prayer includes the forgiveness of sin (Sk.).
22 f. The oath of ordeal. — When one is charged with crime
and made to affirm his innocence by taking an oath of curse, or
having one invoked upon him by the priest, Yahweh is asked to
decide, by fulfilling the curse if he is guilty, or leaving him un-
harmed if innocent (cf. Ex. 22'-»2 Nu. 5"").
24 f . Prayer in defeat. — If the people are defeated in war Yah-
weh is asked in view of their supplication to forgive them and estab-
lish them in their land. The phrase and bring them again into the
land has been thought inconsistent with prayer iri this house, and
hence the text by slight emendation has been made to read and
cause them to remain in the land (Klo., Bn.). But this is not nec-
essary. Such a slight inconsistency does not affect the clear mean-
ing of the petition. — And if thy people Israel be smitten down
before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee]. That de-
feat in battle was evidence of Yahweh's displeasure caused by
previous sin against him is frequently taught in the OT. (cf. Jos.
71 *• I Ch. 2i'2). Beginning with the belief that God caused the
righteous to prosper and brought misfortune upon the wicked
(cf. Ex. 2320 s Lv. 26, Dt. 28), the ancient Hebrew also inverted
the doctrine, beUeving that prosperity proved previous righteous-
ness and adversity antecedent sin. Thus a natural catastrophe not
only resulted in the destruction of a man's property, but ruined his
reputation as well.
26 f. Prayer in drought. — Cf Dt. 1 1 '^-i? 28^*. Drought was in-
terpreted as a divine punishment for sin, v. s. w. ^* '•, cf. i K. 17/. —
Which thou hast given to thy people for an inheritance]. Cf. v. ^^
which thou gavest to them and to their fathers, and v. " which
thou gavest unto our fathers. The land was considered a sacred
gift to Abraham, and a holy inheritance of his seed after him,
cf. Gn. \2'> et al.
344 2 CHRONICLES
28-31. Prayer in various calamities. — This covers every case
of misfortune {cf. v. "). — 28. Caterpillar] "consumer" (EVs.),
properly a kind of locust (cf. Jo. i-"). — In the land of their gates] i.e.,
cities. The gates were considered sacred, which perhaps accounts
for the use of "gates" for "cities" (cf. Dt. i2'2 e/ al., v. EBi. II. col.
1645). — 29. Who shall know every man his own plague and his own
sorrow] i.e., let Yahweh hearken unto ever}- suppliant who has rec-
ognised that his misfortunes are a just divine punishment. — 30.
According to all his ways] does not mean that God should recom-
pense him according to his acts, for he has just suffered punish-
ment on their account; rather, may Yahweh render according as
he perceives the sincerity of the sinner's repentance. — For thou,
even thou only, knowest the hearts of the children of men]. Yahweh's
recompense is just even if it may not appear so, for he only is able
to perceive man's true condition.
32 f . Prayer of the foreigner. — No condition is placed upon
the foreigner. Thus the teaching here is broader than that of
the promise of Is. 56^ '•, which requires of the foreigner the keep-
ing of the Sabbath day as a condition of being heard by Yah-
weh.— 33. For thy name is called upon this house]. The name
of Yahweh was pronounced upon the house, i.e., the house was
called by his name and he became its owner. This involved
responsibility for its welfare on the part of Yahweh (cf. EBi. III.
col. 3266).
34 f. Prayer in war. — This petition is parallel to w. 24 f , but
there the prayer is for aid against an enemy which has been vic-
torious because of Israel's sin, while here the writer is thinking of
a petition for aid when Yahweh shall send Israel forth in a right-
eous war. With the following petition it is usually regarded
as an exilic addition in i K. (i.e., D-) (so Kau., St. SBGT.,
Sk.).
36-39. Prayer in captivity.— C/. Dt. 30" Lv. 26" «. This
petition in i K. 8 is considerably longer (w. *" • ^-"). The Chron-
icler substituted a more beautiful ending to the prayer in w.^"'.
40-42. The conclusion of the prayer. — Written by the Chron-
icler. This differs widely from the conclusion given in i K. 8"",
where the plea for a hearing of prayer, after Dt. 9=^ =', is based
VI. 12-42.] PRAYER OF DEDICATION
345
upon Yahweh's possession of Israel through their redemption from
Egypt. Here, on the other hand, with customary post-exilic forms
of invocation, the plea rings with greater exultation in the thought
of the Temple being the resting-place of Yahweh, the abode of
his ark and of his priests, and in remembrance of the good deeds
of David or (better) the divine covenant with him. — 40. Let thine
eyes be opened]. Cf. v. 20 715 i K. 8"- " Ne. i^ Dn. 9". — And thine
ears attentive]. Cf. 7'= Ne. i«" Ps. 1302. — The prayer of this
place] i.e., the prayer directed toward this place, cf. v. 2° (Be.),
rather than in this place (Ke., RV.). — 41. Parallel with Ps. 132',
from which it was probably taken. — Arise Yahweh] the first
words of the ancient song of the ark, Nu. lo'^ — For thy resting,
etc.]. Yahweh and his ark had hitherto had no permanent
dwelling-place in Israel. — Be clothed with salvation]. Attributes
are represented in the OT. as clothing put on {cf. Jb. 29'^ Ps.
93' 104' Is. ii^). Salvation is equivalent to righteousness. — And
let thy pious ones (those devoted to the service of Yahweh) re-
joice in prosperity. — 42. Turn not away the face of thine anointed]
i.e., hear his prayer. The anointed, then, is Solomon. The
words are from Ps. 132'". — Loving kindnesses of David] either
shown to David, especially the promises made to him {cf. Is.
55') (so RV., Be., Kau., Zoe., Oe., Ki.), or, less good, after 32^^,
the good deeds of David (RVm., Ke.).
12. -i::y^i] i K. 8" -|- naSa». — Vijs] i K. -f- DiDtt-n, with which this
final clause of v. 12 js repeated at the end of v. '3. — 13. Sni^'i . . . ncj? 13
wanting in i K. — ivd] elsewhere a pot or basin, hence the platform may
have been round-like in structure (BDB.), but it is better to read jv; from
]io (formation like -noS from laS, etc.) {cf. Am. 5^6 ?) platform, cf. 05 iSdo-is
(Klo., Oe.). — '1JI E'-i£3''i] repeated from end of v. '2. — 14 . v^xni DiC';:o] i K.
823 nnnn ynNn Spi Sycn o^'cao. — 16. Tnina] (an interpretation of) i K. 8"
<JsS. — 17 . 7\^7^>'\ wanting in i K., but given in some mss. and in 05, &, TJ, of
I K., hence, as usage in this chapter shows, is to be received into the text of
I K. (Ki. BH., St. SBOT.).—\w] 4 mss., i K. S^^ 4- nj.— Tn*-] i
K. "ass nn. — 18. o-^nh pn] wanting in i K. 8", though given in 05 of K.,
and thus accepted by Klo., Bn., Bur., but not by St. SBOT.—l^. At
the end of the verse after T'JbS i K. S'* -f Dvn given also in 05. — 20.
rh•h^ onv] i K. S^^ dpi nS'''^, <g, &, in i K. agree with Ch. — Dif iciy oit:''^]
I K. 829 3!^ ,ctf rrriv — 21. 'junr.] i K. 8'" njnn. — d'cdh p ^n3B' Dipcc]
a direct change by the Chronicler from O'DB'n Sa ^^^^' DipD hv. of i K.
346 2 CHRONICLES
8'", making an easier construction (Sn denoting in or at is not common).
— 22. dn] I K. 8" -\Z'H HN, a change by.the Chronicler for an easier con
struction. — nSs n^i] (S here and in K. has n?Ni k31 and he comes and
swears, which is preferred by Kau., Ki., Bn., and Bur. on K., but
SBOT. and Ki. on K. have nSsa f<ai after Ne. lo'". — 23. o^ca'n jc] i K.
8^2 a''DK'n simply ace. of place. The Chronicler has similarly inserted
JD before d^cbti in vv. s^- ^o. — y^.-iS aij-n'^] read after i K. 8=12 and (&
yen V'tt'inS demanded by the parallelism of the following clause (Ki.,
Bn.). — 24. i-iJ^ DNi] I K. S" tiJjriD. — >j] i K. irs. — utJ'i] i K. + i^Sn
although wanting in (&, which is followed by SBOT., but since the
phrase to turn unto Yahweh is very frequent Bur. prefers to retain it.
The pronoun is certainly understood. — T'Jfl'^] i K. ^'S^•. — 25. jc] cf.
V. 22.— ion--] wanting in i K. 83^.-26. Supply, after i K. 8^^ 1 before
onKonD. — Djyn] to be vocalised ajj-i.- after (g in i K. 8^5 (g (Oe., Kau.,
Bn., Ki., also AV., RV.). Ba. prefers (with RVm. and &) JK because
thou answerest them. — 27. Note n^Dtt'n without the p, cf. vv. 23- =5- 3o_
Ki. inserts, after (S, "H. — 28. n^n-' ^3 aj?n]an order of words — subject, con-
junction, and verb — not infrequent in P (Lv. 12 22 42 51. 4, et al., also
Is. 2818 Mi. s' Ps. 62") (see Bur. i K. 8").— The I's before ppi^ and
SiDPi are wanting in i K. 8". — r2\s] 05, i K. i:3''N. — Tix3] read inxa after
<g of K. (Kau., Bn., Ki.). Oe. reads, after ^, inyii-ai «-\N2. C5 has
KaTivavTL rwv Tr6\euv. Ba. suggests V"i23 by making a breach in his
gates. This verse breaks off abruptly without final verb — aposiopesis
(Ges. §167). — 29.0N3Dnj.'jj] i K. 838iDa'7i'jj.— 30. D''a-^n |d] cf. v. 23. —
After nnSoi i K. 8^9 has nT;-i.— a^S] many mss., i K. + So.— 31. naSS
T'3n-i3] wanting in i K. 8". — 32. njjn Sn qji] ^bl ^-^j^ri h:> without Sn, a
reading followed by Klo. in i K. 8". — After iDa* i K. S" has Jiyce" >o
^r:•J' HN, which seems to have been omitted through an oversight by the
Chronicler or by a copyist by homoeoteleuton. — 33 . nn.si] 1 wanting in
I K. 8^^ but there in (S. — o^DS'n jn] cf. v. 23; similarly i K. 8" has jidd
instead of pacn. — 34. rans] 1 K. 8" u^n. — T'Sn] i K. run'- Sn. The
former, required by the person of the verbs, may be the original (St.
SBOT., Bur.).— HNrn i^j?n] i K. n^jjn. The Chronicler has added the
pronoun for the sake of clearness. — 35. D''Da'n }d] cf. v. 23. — 36. After
inx I K. 846 has a>iNri, but 05 of i K. also omits it, and the lack of the
article with nrnpn and r^2^•^p shows that the word is an insertion (St.
SBOT.).— 37. Dor] I K. 8" nn^atf. The reading of Ch. is probably
correct (Bur.), but St. SBOT. retains ^. — ij>"ini UMyn] i K. irijjni
^y;v•^. 1 should go with both verbs (SBOT., &) or be rejected before
both (Bur. after 05, "H, ® of i K. and <S of Ch.).— 38. DOtt']. Connection
requires after d onuc (Ki., Bn.). i K. 8^8 has onn^N. — don lai:' ib'n']
wanting in (S^a^ but not in 05''. — After iS'^onm i K. has yhn. — T-yni] 1 is
wanting in i K.— nuVi] i K. n^ani which Bn. reads.— 39. poDD D'orn jn]
cf. V. 33. — Dn^njnn] i K. 8!« onjnn.
Vn. 1-22.] CONCLUSION OF DEDICATION 347
VII. 1-22. The closing events following the prayer of dedica-
tion.— In I K. 8"-9' the first of these events is Solomon's blessing
of the people (w. 54 -ei)^ which is entirely omitted by the Chronicler,
perhaps because he had already removed Solomon in a sense from
his position before the altar, placing him upon a brazen pulpit (6"),
and perhaps because he regarded such a blessing as the especial
function of a priest, or perhaps simply because he thought tradi-
tion had supplied a better conclusion in the story of fire descending
from heaven which he narrates. This story certainly enhanced the
importance of the occasion and testified that the divine approbation
was given as clearly at the completion of the Temple as at the time
of the original selection of its site (i Ch. 2126). The statement that
with the descent of the fire the glory of Yahweh filled the house
and that the priests could not enter (v. ^), is most natural in this
connection. Yet since the cloud had also manifested itself before
Solomon's prayer, according to the narrative given in i K. 8'" '■ and
reproduced in 5", it has been assumed that here another written
source was used by the Chronicler (Bn., Ki.), yet the Chronicler
could have invented this narrative even as he added the miraculous
fire in i Ch. 21'"'.
1. Now when Solomon had made an end of praying]. These words
are from i K. 8'K— The fire, etc.]. Cf. i Ch. 2126 i K. 18^^" and
especially for this and the following verse Lv. 9^^ f-. That offerings
were at hand on the altar for sacrifice after the prayer of dedication
is most natural ; hence the omission of any reference to their prepa-
ration is not striking {cf. also 5«). — 2. Cf. 5'^ Ex. 40'^' — 3. The
pavement] clearly a marked feature of the court of the Temple
(cf. Ez. 40'^ '■). These verses show how the narrative of P con-
cerning the appearances of Yahweh in connection with the taber-
nacle, influenced at the time of the Chronicler the story of Solo-
mon's Temple.
4-7. The sacrifices of the King and people. — Taken from i K.
8"-", with the addition of the musical service of the priests and the
Levites mentioned in v. «. — 5. Twenty-two thousand oxen and a
hundred and twenty thousand sheep]. The correctness of these
figures cannot be tested because the number of persons present at
the dedication is difficult to estimate. The number 120,000
348
2 CHRONICLES
(10,000 for each tribe) appears to be artificial. In Roman times
256,500 paschal lambs are said to have been slaughtered in a few
hours (Jos. BJ. vi. 9, 3). — 6. According to their offices] i.e., in their
appointed positions (a2{f ihren Posten, Kau.). The Levites also
stood in similar stations with the musical instruments designed
for sacred service which David had made (cf. i Ch. 23^ Am. 6«) to
give thanks unto Yahweh (for his loving kindness endnreih forever)
when David praised through their ministry (lit. their hands). The
emphasis is on the fact of the Levites using instruments " which
David had introduced when he praised God by the playing of the
Levites " (Ke.). — And the priests sounded, etc.]. Cf. 5'^. — 7. More-
over, Solomon hallowed the middle of the court that was before the
house of Yahweh]. This statement, taken substantially from i K.
8", purports to be the description of a temporary altar, but prob-
ably preserves the memory of the real and only altar of Solomon's
day, viz., the top of the rock in front of the house, cf. note on 4'.
— Because the brazen altar which Solomon had made was not able to
receive, etc.]. The glossator who introduced the brazen altar into
I K. 86« probably thought of a smaller structure than that which the
Chronicler describes (4'), hence this remark is less appropriate
here than in i K.
8-10. The feast,— Taken from i K. 8"f , with the following
notable modifications. In the original text of Kings the feast, pre-
sumably that of the Tabernacles, lasted seven days, and on the
eighth day the people were dismissed to their homes. This duration
of the feast is in accordance with the Deuteronomic law (Dt. i6'2).
In Chronicles we have not one festival, but two; first that of the
Dedication of the Altar, seven days, and secondly that of the Feast of
Tabernacles, seven days. This first appears in i K. 8" in the and
seven days even fourteen days, but those words are wanting in (S» ,
and the way in which the next verse commences with reference to
the eighth day shows that they formed no part of the original text,
but have crept in, probably through the influence of Chronicles
or the tradition which Chronicles represents (Ki., Bn., Bur., 550r.,
et al.). The Chronicler seems to have taken exception to the use of
the Feast of Tabernacles, which served for a special purpose, for
the dedication of the Temple, and makes the King therefore cele-
Vn. 1-22.] CONCLUSION OF DEDICATION ^ .q
brate a double feast : the dedication of the Temple from the eighth
to the fourteenth day of the seventh month, and the Feast of Taber-
nacles from the fifteenth to the twenty-second day, the people being
dismissed on the twenty-third (v. '") (SBOT. on K.). He also in-
troduces on the eighth day of the second festival a holy assembly
(v. «) after the law of P, which added this to the Feast of Taber-
nacles (Lv. 2^^), and thus his day of dismissal is the ninth day, the
twenty-third day of the seventh month (v. i"). (The Feast of Tab-
ernacles commenced on the fifteenth day of the month and its last
day was the twenty-first day; the following day of holy convocation
was the twenty-second, and the day after that the twenty-third.)
— 8. So Solomon held the feast at that time seven days] i.e., the Feast
of Tabernacles from the fifteenth to the twenty-first of the seventh
month (v. s.). — From the entrance of Ha math unto the brook of
Egypt] the extreme northern and southern boundaries respec-
tively, c/. I Ch. 135. The brook of Egypt is usually identified with
mod. Wddy el Arlsh, south-west of Palestine in the wilderness of
Paran {cf. EBi. II. col. 1249; DB. I. p. 667). — 9. On the eighth
day] the twenty-second of the seventh month. — The dedication of
the altar seven days] from the eighth to the fourteenth (v. s.).
— 10. Unto their tents] not unusual for homes, cf. Ps. 91'° Ju. 19'
et al.
11-22. The vision in answer to Solomon's prayer. — Based
upon I K. 9'-', yet containing the independent vv. »2b^-i5.
This new matter, from the common expression my ears shall be at-
tentive {T\^2•yp 'J'n)) seems akin to the new ending to the dedicatory
prayer, and hence the entire paragraph, since the text of i K. also in
other points is not always closely followed, is held by Bn. and Ki. to
have come from another source than i K., but there is really no reason
why the Chronicler need not have written it.
12. For a house of sacrifice]. This phrase, while in full accord
with the Deuteronomic idea of the choice of the sanctuary as a
dwelling-place of the divine name (given in i K. 9' and v. ■«), yet ex-
presses more distinctly the priestly idea of the Temple as the place
of sacrifice. — 13. This and the two following verses in their con-
dition and promise are parallel with the form of Solomon's prayer
in the previous chapter {cf. 6''^-^^- "-as). — 14. My people upon
350
2 CHRONICLES
whom my name is called]. This idiom means that they belong to
Yahweh, hence Yahweh owes them protection, cf. 6". — 15. Cf.
6*°. — 20. And I will ?nake it a proverb and a by-word among all
peoples] the Deuteronomic punishment for disobedience, cf. Dt.
28", also Je. 24».
1. naSs* mS3Di] i K. 8" 'ui ^rri.— 1-\> u'sni] Dr. TH. § 128, p. 89 f.n.;
Ges. § iiib. — 3. nmm] Ges. § 1132; Ew. § 351 c. Such a form of the
inf. abs. is not entirely unknown elsewhere, cf. Ges. §§ T$n.ff., iiT)X.
— 4, D>-n S31] I K. 862 123? hii-\'i?-< Sdi.— 5. iSrn] wanting in i K. 8",
though there in (8. — i K. after n3i has nin^*? nar -\:i'N DTV^n and -\?z in-
stead of npan in Ch. Kau. prefers ipa as the necessary correlative form
with INS. — d'hSn] I K. nin\ — n>-n] i K. Ssnc'^ ija. — 6. ann-c-a S'] (S ^^2
Tas 0vXoKds. U /« 5i</5 qficiis, Be. t^or z7zre« Geschdften, Oe. wfer //z.-e«
Obliegsnheiten, Ki. 6e/ z7zre» Dienstverrichtungen. — i-n n^y Ti\s] (^ba
ToO AauetS. — di^3 imt SSna] (g ^^z vfivoii AavelS dia x«p^s aurtD;', H hymnos
David canentes per matnis siias, approved by Be., Zoe., and Oe., who
translates mit dem Hallel Davids von ihnen vorgetragen, and Kau.
indent sie so dett Lobpreis Davids vortrugen, and Ki. mit dem von ihnen
angestimmten Lobgesang, yet the view of Ke., given above, is to be pre-
ferred.— anxxna] cf. 1 Ch. 1524. — 7. Instead of n~^ir t-ipM i K. 8" has
^Sc^ i5'-i|i Ninn ora. — mSyn] i K. has sing, followed by nnj?:n tni. —
D-'jSnn TNI nnjsn nxi rh^!^ ns S^anS h^T nS nDSc na^j; la^N] i K. has t-'n
D''D'?S'n "ijSn PNi nnjsn nxi nSijjn nx S'onn ]t2p mn> >jflS. The Chronicler
introduces the altar as Solomon's, in view of its size, i K. mentions no
such great altar {cf. 4'). — 8. In i K. 8" N>nn nj::i precede Jnn and n>"3-J'
D^n^ followed by the gloss {v. s.) dt> sz'y n>'a-\K D'-D"' nyaa'i close the verse,
but between onsa and a^a'' t\-;iz' i K. has the words u^nSs nin> •'izh. — 9.
This verse, save in the words ^rauM orj, is entirely independent of i
K. 866. — 10. In I K. 866 the dismissal is on the Sth day (of the feast) in-
stead of the 2yd of the month of the seventh month. And instead of sim-
ply anions'? Bi'n ns n^v, i K. has aniSnxS i^Siii'^an pn 13-1311 oynnNnSr. —
n3Vi3n Sy] some mss., i K. 'n So '?>•. — -fn'^] i K. -H nay. — na'rs'Si] an
addition of the Chronicler. — 11. r>j ns naStf Sdm] i K. 9' diSdd inii
nua"? naSs'. — ma'):'*? naSif jS Sj; Nan Sz hni] i K. Kcn iu'n naSB* pc>n So hni
nia'j?'^. The remainder of the verse is wanting in I K. — 12. nSiSa] want-
ing in I K. 92 or represented in n^jc, which is followed by vSn nxij ns'Na
Jij?aj3, entirely omitted in Ch. After lasM i K. 9^ has mni and also v'^n
instead of iS. The new matter in Ch. follows inSfln, commencing,
however, with a parallel to I have sanctified this hoicse in the statement
I have chosen this place for myself, etc. — 16. The text of i K. g^'^^ '" is
now resumed and introduced with Tnna nnj? of v. '2b^ and i is placed
before intt'ipn and nnja t^'n is omitted after nrn, and r^vrh is read in-
stead of Dis-S. — 17. After T'2n i K. 9^ has Tw"ai aaS c.^a. — nm^'^i] 1 is
Vm. 1-18.] VARIOUS ACTS OF SOLOMON
351
wanting in i K., and should be struck, out (Be, Oe., Kau., Ki.), yet may
be retained and inf. construed as a continuation of nSn, cf. dib'Vi i S.
8'2 3itt'i 2 Ch. 30', Dr. TH. § 206, Ges. § \\a,p. — pni] i K, ^1^, but
<g, H, &, have ■'pni. — 18. imoSc] cf. i'; i K. 9^ insSoD followed by
oSyS Snt^'' Vy. — •T'nS ipid] i K. in '?]? ^"Tl2-l. With "'Hid one would ex-
pect nna (yet c/. 5'"), but probably 'm^ in Ch. has come into the text
by copyist glancing forward to ms'' nS (Be.). — Snt^o '7i:'id] i K. ndo Sj;d
Sn-i-;». Be. thought the change in Ch. due directly to the remembrance
of Mi. 5'. (& in I K. has this reading of Ch. — 19. The introductory
1 is lacking in i K. 9^, and before -^yzwr^ i K. has 3V.;' inf. absol., and after
DPN has nnND D3'':3i and '\-\':^VT\ nSi instead of Dna?>'i, and the next two
words are transposed. — 20. •'nanx Syo cntt'.nji] i K. 9' ^^-\v^ ns imsni
n::-iNn ^jo Sj*a. In i K. nin after T\^v\ is wanting, and instead of -\-hv^
cast Old, it has nSrs send out, and Sxnc'i n>ni instead of uj.-'Ni. — 21.
ji'Sy r\-r\ la-N] i K. 9^ ]v^i} n-n^. The text of Ch. is an endeavour to con-
strue the predicate of ntn nun as a relative and thus make sense with
the adj. JvSy. The true reading in i K. was D^JJ ruiiis instead of
]V^y (after w£^ desolate of &, Ki., Bur., SBOT., et al.) and this house
shall he ruins: everyone who passes by, etc. — SdS] on the subj. intro-
duced by S cf. Ges. § 1436. i K. has S3. — After Dii" i K. has p-\\v^. —
nc3 -iDNt] I K. has nn hy ncNi. — 22 . Dn^r3t< ''nha] i K. 9* on'-nSx. — DN>sin]
I K. 3n3N rx N'lXin. — After xun i K. has nirr'.
VIII. 1-18. Various Doings of Solomon. — Taken with
some changes from i K. q'^-^s.
1-2. The exchange of cities with Hiram. — I K. 9>°-'^ This
transaction has been given an entirely different appearance by the
Chronicler. According to the narrative of Kings, Solomon gave the
King of Tyre twenty cities (towns or villages) in payment for timber
and gold, and Hiram was displeased with them, although he seems
to have annexed them under the name Cabul to his kingdom. But
according to the narrative of Chronicles, Solomon received the
cities from Hiram and rebuilt or embellished or fortified and colo-
nised them with Israelites. The two statements have been har-
monised (i) by the assumption that Solomon first ceded the twenty
cities to Hiram, who, because they were in bad condition or of little
worth {cf. I K. 9'2), restored them to him, whereupon Solomon built
them up (Jos. Ant. viii. 5, 3, Seb. Schmidt, Starke, Dahler, Ke.);
(2) by the assumption that Solomon gave Hiram twenty Israelitish
cities for which the latter gave him twenty Phoenician cities, and
that Kings refers to the former gift and Chronicles to the latter
352
2 CHRONICLES
(Kimchi and other Jewish commentators). In reality, however, the
Chronicler has remodelled the statement of Kings (Be., Oe.), the
thought being probably offensive to him that Solomon should part
with any of his territory to Hiram, or incredible that the rich and
glorious Solomon should have been so pressed for money that he
would sell a portion of his territory, hence the passage was changed
to convey the opposite meaning. That the passage in Chronicles
is directly dependent upon that of Kings and not a free composi-
tion is seen in the parallelism between the introductory verses. — 1.
Twenty years\ Seven years were spent in building the Temple (i
K. 6") and thirteen in building the palace (i K. y). — 2. BiiiWl
with the force of rebuild or enlarge (BDB. piii 1 i.) or fortify
(Bn., Ki.); so also built in the following verses.
3-6. The store and military cities which Solomon built. —
Taken with considerable variation from I K. 9''-". The Chronicler
has entirely omitted the contents of i K. g'^ '■ which speak of Solomon's
levy caused by a number of building operations, and of his acquisi-
tion of Gezer through Pharaoh his father-in-law; and omitting the
reference to Gezer in v. '^, he has rearranged the contents of the
verse and given also a new introduction to the paragraph in the
statement of a campaign not mentioned elsewhere against Ha-
math-zobah, probably with reference to Tadmor, which the Chron-
icler has constructed out of Tamar (v. i.). — 3. Hamath-zobah]. Cf.
I Ch. 18'. This campaign, since it is not mentioned in i K., is
generally entirely ignored in histories of Israel or Solomon. Neither
Bn. nor Ki. discusses its historicity. Certainly it is very doubtful;
yet Winckler thinks it not at all incredible (Gesch. Is. II. p. 266,
KAT.^ p. 239). — 4. Tadmor] in the text of i K. 9'* is Tamar (ICH),
but the Qr. or margin has Tadmor (iDin). This is followed by all
versions (B Palmyra m) and was formerly accepted as the true read-
ing of I K. Tadmor was the later Palmyra situated north-east of
Damascus; but the other towns mentioned in i K. 9'^ '■ are all in S.
Palestine, and in Ez. 47'' 482* a Tamar ("Ittn) is placed in the ex-
treme south; hence the text of i K. seems to be the true reading and
the reference is to Tamar in S. Judah (Bn., Ki., Bur., et al.), but the
Chronicler has glorified this obscure southern city into the Tadmor
of the north, and, as mentioned above, composed v.' as an introduc-
Vm. 1-18.] VARIOUS ACTS OF SOLOMON 353
tion. — And all the store cities which he built in Hamath]. This
statement has no parallel in i K., but is simply the Chronicler's
completion of the reference to Tadmor as one of a line ot fortified
posts on the northern frontier of Solomon's kingdom. — 5. In i K.
9'' only the lower Beth-horon is mentioned. Upper Beth-horon and
fortified cities with walls, doors, and bars are an addition of the
Chronicler. On the location of the Beth-horons cf. 1 Ch. 6" (^s). —
6. Ba'alath] Jos. 19^^ i K. 9'^ f, not clearly identified.
7-10. Solomon's bond-servants. — Taken from i K. 920-". — 8.
Whom the children of Israel consumed not]. The reading of i K.
9=' "whom the children of Israel were not able utterly to destroy"
was an unpleasant admission to the Chronicler, hence this change.
— Of them did Solomon raise a levy]. According to the clear im-
plication of I K. 5"-3» (i3-i6)j at least the levy of 30,000 men for work
in the Lebanons was composed of Israelites, and probably also the
levy of 150,000 men. The revolt under Rehoboam (i K. 12) was
based upon this oppressive measure. This passage (from a late
addition to i K.) is merely an attempt to rescue the reputation of
Solomon. (Cf. Sm. Hist. pp. 157/.)- — 10. Even two hundred and
fifty] is at variance with the number in i K. 9^3 "five hundred and
fifty" (v. i.).
11. The house of Pharaoh's daughter. — Rewritten from i K.
9='. According to I K. 3 'Solomon brought Pharaoh's daughter on her
marriage into the city of David until the completion of his palace,
when he made also a house for her (i K. 78), and according to i K.
9^^ she moved from the city of David into this houee. The Chron-
icler passes over entirely the first statement and interprets the re-
moval as caused by Solomon from a religious motive. The city of
David the Chronicler interprets as the holy precincts where the ark
had been brought and where, after the notion of Ezekiel (44'), the
presence of Solomon's foreign wife might be regarded as a sacrilege.
In I K. g^* it is also stated that Solomon then built Millo. This is
entirely omitted in Chronicles (an evidence according to Bn. of the
use here of another written source than K., but such omission is en-
tirely agreeable to the Chronicler's handling of the text).
12 f . Solomon's ministrations at the altar of the Temple. —
Rewritten from i K. 9". According to this verse in Kings, Solomon
2^4 2 CHRONICLES
offered burnt-offerings and peace-offerings three times in a year,
clearly on the three annual feasts commanded by the legislation of
JE (Ex. 23"-"=) and of D (Dt. 16'-'^). This ministration the Chron-
icler retains, mentioning also the feasts by name (v-.'^^)^ but in addi-
tion to these annual services the weekly Sabbatical and monthly
ones are added (v.''") and thus the ministrations of the King are
made to conform more with the fully developed ritual of P (Lv.
23'-"). All trace, also, of any service at the altar of incense (men-
tioned in I K. 9"), which would be an unlawful act {cf. 26>«), has
been removed by the clear definition of the altar as the one which
he [Solomon] /w J huilt before the porch, i.e., the great brazen altar of
burnt-offering (4'). — 12. Then] after the dedication of the Tem-
ple when this service of Solomon commenced. — 13. The comtnand-
ment of Moses] a comprehensive expression for the legislation
given in the Pentateuch. Sabbaths, months, and seasons or set
feasts cover the fixed times when extra ceremonies in the ritual
of offerings were required. These were the v/eekly Sabbaths and
the beginnings of each month, including the Feast of Trumpets,
and the three great festivals with their associated days of wave-
sheaf (with the Passover) and atonement (in the same month
with the Feast of Tabernacles) (cf. Lv. 23' -s" Nu. 28^-29"). On
these days it is implied that the King himself took part in some
direct way in the sacrificial services.
14-16. Solomon's appointments for service in the Temple
and its completion. — A continuation of the elaboration of i K. 9^^
parallel only in- v. "= •> with i K. 9"b. — 14. For David's order
for the divisions of the priests and the Levites and the gate-keepers
cf. I Ch. 23-26. — 15. The king] David. — The treasures] i.e., the
furniture of the Temple and the stuff contributed for its services
and support, the provision for its ministers {cf. i Ch. 262"-"). —
16. The final summary: And all the work of Solomon was accom-
plished frotn the day of the foundation of the house of Yahweh unto
the completion of the house of Yahweh through Solomon'^ (Bn., Ki.),
17 f. Solomon's trade at Ophir. — Taken with some changes
from I K. 926-28, According to i K., Solomon builds ships at Ezion-
geber and Hiram, King of Tyre, provides him with sailors that go
with the servants of Solomon to Ophir. According to Chronicles,
Vm. 1-18.] VARIOUS ACTS OF SOLOMON 355
Solomon went to Ezion-geber, where Hiram sent him both ships and
sailors. This discrepancy has been reconciled on the supposition
that the sending of ships was only the sending of material for their
construction (Ke., Z^e.); or an identity of meaning has been found
by following (&, ^, in striking out to him (^h), i.e., Hiram sent like-
wise to Ophir ships from a harbour on the Red Sea or Persian Gulf
where the Phoenicians might have had a trading-post (Oe.). But
the discrepancy is real and probably arose through the Chronicler's
careless reading of the text of i K., unless one may assume such a
lack of geographical knowledge that he really thought ships, as well
as sailors, could be sent from Tyre to Ezion-geber. According to
Chronicles 450 talents of gold were brought back, while according
to Kings only 420. — Ezion-geber and Eloth]. These two places were
near together at the northern extremity of the Gulf of Akabah.
The exact site of the former is unknown; on the supposition that the
gulf extended formerly further inland, Robinson identified it with
Ain-el-Ghiidyan, fifteen miles north of the present head of the gulf.
Elath or Eloth is the mod. 'Akabah at the head of the gulf. —
Ophir], The exact locality is unknown. It has been placed on
the eastern coast of Africa, in India, and in south-eastern Arabia.
The latter is the most likely (r/. i Ch. i").
1. an-.r-y] Kau., Ki. SBOT., Kom., both here and in i K. 91" prefix
the article, 'yn, after Kb. — After nnSa* i K. has OTian ^iv nx. — inia hni]
I K. I'r'Dn P'a nxi. — 6. After nSya nKi this verse corresponds with i K.
Qi', with variation only of ^:i inserted before the second iij; and before
pu'n. — 7. The Chronicler has departed from i K. 920 only in transposing
^iDNH and ^nnn and in the use of the copulative ( 1), which i K. has only
with 'Dn''n, and in the omission of ''J3 before SNntt'\ — 8. p] wanting in
& and I K. g^', appears contrary to all the people (v. '), hence is to be
struck out (Be., Ki.; retained with partitive force by Ke., Zoe., Oe.). —
Sn-isj" 1J3 Di'^3 nS] is a neat abbreviation of the text of i K. ■'ja iSj^ nS
oannnS Sntj". — After DcS i K. has ^3y which was struck out evidently be-
cause regarded as superfluous. — -9. ih'n] wanting in i K. q^^, some MSS.,
and (&, 19, &, is defended by Be. as an Aramaism, but is rightly struck out
by Zoe., Oe., Kau., Ki. — in^xSoS DnajJ*?] i K. i2y. The Chronicler's
additions are for clearness.— ncnSc] in i K. followed by mjyi.— vii'^Sc nB"!]
to be read after i K. and (S rtriSuM Y-\•^^. — 10. I'^sS] i K. 9^3 n3K':'cn Sy.
The reason of this change is not clear unless for brevity. — OTixm D^'trnn]
I K. niND iVDni o^B'cn. The smaller number of Ch. is due probably to a
356 2 CHRONICLES
copyist's oversight. Bn., Ki., find, however, in this evidence for another
copy than i K. before the Chronicler. — i K. has njs'^ca C'r>n at close
of verse after d;'3. — 11. m:r\'^ pi., perhaps after the analogy of the plurals
of place or spatial extension. — 13. ara av imai]. The same phrase
wanting the 3 with nai occurs in Lv. 23'". To omit 3 gives an easier
reading, but all mss. have it (Be.); 2 essentia (Ke., Zoe.); <& apparently
nana (Oe.). — m'^-yn^] instead of inf. abs., Ew. § 2S0 d (Ke., Zoe., Oe.).
Cf. I Ch. 925 i3< 152 Ges. § 114^ (?) (1. 129).— 'ui jna] cf. Dt. i6^K—
14. iDy>i] cf. I Ch. 6'« WD (1. 89).— osrcD] cf. I Ch. ig's.— -ip'-n::] cf. i
Ch. 23" (1. 42).— a.-insi'":] cf. i Ch. 9". — -»>'i:'i -\-;-y^'\ at every gate (1.
124). — 15. Pixc] retained by Ke., Zoe., cf. Ew. § 282 a; read with
ID (nisoa) Be., Kau., Ki. Kom.; pi. (n^x::) (&, "H, Oe., Ki., SBOT.—l%.
ovn n;*] unto the (this) day, i.e., the day on which after the consecration
of the completed Temple the regular public worship was commenced in
it (Be., Ke., Zoe.). Now all the work of Solomon was prepared until this
day, the foundation of the house until its completion: the house of Yahweh
was finished (Ke.). ."13XS3 is taken as explained by iDi":. Dr. TH.
§ 190 Obs. suggests that nvn is a case of apposition. But this rendering of
Ke. and that of AV. are harsh; better after (i», U, &, read Dvr^from tite day
of the foundation (Oe., Ki.). (g read also nin'' n^2 n::'^-y ni'?3 -i>. This
(given above) is preferred by Bn., Ki. Kom. C6^ has this and also
^T^^2 t;. Bn. regards the conclusion as from the uncanonical source.
Much, however, is in favour of nin'' .n>3 a'^c coming from i K. g"-^, and
in no way being a corruption. — 17. ni'^'X '^xi -13 J ]vr;'? nz^y i^n ix] i
K. 9-6 ni'^^x px irx -I3J ]Vi-;2 nc'-'-y I'^cn r^z-; <jxi. — a^n] i K. liD B\ — 18.
iS] wanting in i K. 9". — a^'i^yi nrjix v^d; -\-2] i K. ''^'jx viay rx '>jx2
HT'JX. — -a^] I K. a^n. — The Chronicler has transposed nsSr -"nay a;, and
ix3''i of I K. 927=8 — 3-.;'::ni] i K. 9-8 a^^r;'i. — i K. has an; before yaix.
IX. 1-12. The visit of the Queen of Sheba,— Taken with
almost no variations from i K. 10 ''^ — 1. Sheba] the land of the
Sabeans, often mentioned in the OT., cf. i Ch. i' ". Since Sheba
was famous for its trade (Ez. 27"- ") and costly wares (Ez. 38'=), its
Queen could well have heard of Solomon and his lu.xurious court.
In Is. 6o« its inhabitants are represented as about to bring gold and
frankincense as tribute to Israel and to pay homage to Yahweh. —
Hard questions] (miTl). This word is used in the sense of dark,
obscure sayings, or riddles to be guessed (as in the Samson stories,
Ju. 14), or simply perplexing questions, the probable meaning here
(BDB.). The Queen of Sheba with costly gifts came to test the
report of Solomon's wisdom and glory, of which she had heard in
distant Arabia.— 2. After she had tested the King's wisdom and, 3,
IX. 1-12.] VISIT OF QUEEN OF SHEBA 357
had observed the house thai he had built — i.e., either the Temple
or, what is more likely, the palace (r/. v. '), or all his buildings con-
sidered as one structure — and, 4, the luxurious appointments of his
servants, there was no more spirit {breath) in her, she being quite
overcome by astonishment. Cf. Jos. 2" 5', where the phrase is
used for the loss of breath through fear. — And his ascent by which
he went up unto the house of Yahweh] AV., RV., but read rather
with RVm. of i K. io=* and his burnt-offering which he offered in
the house of Yahweh (v. i.). — 6. The Chronicler emphasises that
Solomon's wisdom rather than his wealth causes the great aston-
ishment of the foreign queen by adding to the account in i K. the
words the greatness of thy wisdom. — 8. The words his (Yahweh's)
throne (i K. 10' on the throne of Israel) to be king for Yahweh thy
God (an addition of the Chronicler) show in a striking way the
theocratic stand-point of the Chronicler, cf. i Ch. 28^ 292^. — 9. A
hundred and twenty talents of gold] a sum equivalent to more than
three and one-half millions of dollars. — 10. Algum-trees\ Cf.
27(8)_ — 12. Besides that which she had brought unto the king\
This text of Chronicles implies that Solomon gave the Queen
of Sheba all her desire besides the equivalent of that which she
had brought to him (Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.). This notion may have
arisen from the thought that Solomon should in no way be indebted
to the Queen. H renders et multo plura quam attiderat ad eiim. Ber-
theau would read besides that which the king (of his free will) gave
to her (I^Dn rh ^^2r\). The text of i K. 10", besides that which
he gave her according to the hand of King Solomon, means that
Solomon gave to the Queen of Sheba gifts commensurate with his
own wealth and power (SBOT.).
1. npcs'] I K. 10' njjDC. — After nDSsr i K. has ni,T> av'-', a phrase of
much difficulty.— n2'?a' pn mDj"^] i K. ipdj"^. The Chronicler's text is more
definite, cf. v. =. — a'^rn^^] i K. 10= nsS^'ni Nam. — 2-\^] i K. ino 2-\. —
in>'] I K. rSx. — 2. ncScn ^3■^ d'^;j nVi] i K io' -[Sen p dSu -im nT\ a^.
— 3. n33n ns] i K. lo^ ncsn So rs. — 4. anitmSm^] wanting in i K. lo*,
though given in &. — in''Syi] i K. i.^'^yi. The former with the meaning
and his ascent with which he used to ascend to the house of Yahweh is pre-
ferred by Ke., and the rendering of AV., RV., both here and in i K., but
since niSy means upper chamber, and since (&, 13, § have rniSj? his offer-
ings, this is preferable (Be., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki.) {cf. RVm. in K.).
358
2 CHRONICLES
The last clause in <S here and in i K. is Kal i^ eai/r^s iyivero. (Sp-
here has this and also Kal ouk fjv ii> avry ext wvevfj.a. — 5, After ncx i K.
io« has n-in. — 6. oni-ijiS] i K. lo' a^nm'?. — ^^::^^ n^'ans] wanting in i
K., an addition of the Chronicler for clearness, taking the place of
J101 noon, which in i K. follows noD^ written noDin. Instead of *?}? i K.
has Sn. — 7. T'tt'JN] <S, B, # of i K. lo' have y^i':, preferred there by
Klo., Kamp., Bn., Ki. SBOT., Bur., and here by Kau., Ki., Bn. (&^ has
this, but (S^ follows m. — 8. isdd] i K. io^ Snii:" ndj. — ^>^S^< mn'S iSdS]
wanting in i K. — 1^"i':'n] i K. r\-\7\>. — iT'synS] wanting in i K.; a more
directly Messianic thought, keeping in view the future of Israel. — IJP'i]
I K. iDitt'^i. — Dn>'7y] wanting in i K.; must refer to Israel. — 9. 2iS] i
K. lO"" r\2-\7\. — nin] i K. Na. — After xin i K. has aiS ii>'. — 10. dji
VN^an la'N nnVir nayi a-cn nay] i K. lo" az'i iu'n aiin 'jn dji. The Chron-
icler puts the activity here of Solomon or his servants on a par with that
of Hiram or his servants. — aiDij'7N] i K. oijdSn, so also v. », cf. 2\ Here
I K. adds iND r^^-yrs. — 11. DTuSxn] see v. '". — m'^Dc] i K. lo'^ ij-Dn,
dTT., a word whose precise meaning is dubious (BDB.), interpreted as
raised walk, floor, or pavement of some sort with which mSoD would
agree (Raschi, Be., Zoe.), or more generally as a support, a railing or
buttress, (B viro(TTr]piy/xara, IS fulcra (Bur.), then 01^703 is an error
(BDB.) or a misinterpretation. Yet both may represent supports, eleva-
tions in the shape of some sort of a platform or estrade designed for the
dishes or utensils of the Temple and palace (Paul Haupt in SBOT. on
K.). (Kau. [Kamp.] and Ki. both represent the word with a lacuna in
their translations of K. and Ch.). — mini inxa d^jdV an^ inij nSi] i K.
nin DVD ly n,s-\j xSi Q'JdSn 'xy p N3 nS. The phrase in the land of Judah,
instead of in the land of Israel, shows that the Chronicler writes as
one of his own age (Ba.). — 12. ^D^^1 "iSrn Sn nx-an] i K. lo"
jflni T\rhv ^SD^ Tia nS jdj; icn in Ch. is simply a synonym for njo in K.
13-28. The wealth of Solomon.— Taken from iK. lo'^-^s*. The
variations are very slight. — 13. Six hundred and sixty-six talents
of gold] i.e., about twenty millions of dollars, constituted the regular
annual income. — 15. Each of the two hundred bucklers contained
nearly 22 pounds (avoirdupois) of gold, worth nearly 6,000 dollars,
and, 16, each of the three hundred shields contained half this
amount. The reading, three maneh, in i K. 10" is incorrect (v. i.).
— 17. Ivory] was secured by Solomon's navy, cf. v. ^K — 21. Ac-
cording to Chronicles the fleet of Solomon went to Tarshish.
That this view was incorrect is seen from the products of the East
brought back by the vessels and by the reference in i K. 22^' to
Jehoshaphat's ships of Tarshish which were stationed at Ezion-
TX. 13-28.] WEALTH OF SOLOMON 359
geber on the Gulf of Elah to go to Ophir. The Chronicler mis-
understood in both of these instances the phrase ships of Tarshish,
which described a class of vessels such as were used by the Phoeni-
cians in their voyages to Tartessus in Spain, and not their destina-
tion as he supposed. The accuracy of his statement, however, has
been absurdly defended on the supposition that the vessels made a
circuit of Africa to Spain (see Eng. Trans, of Zoe. Com. in Lange
Series, pp. 28 /.).— 25-28. Cf. V
: 14-17
13. Zi-'Z'Z-^] 1 is wanting in i K. lo'^ — n33] i K. 133. — 14, -\ih
onnn 'tr'jxs]. Since these words appear in i K. lo'^, they represent
the original text of Ch. {cf. (§ tCjv dvSpuv also). In their source, i K.,
they are usually regarded as a corruption, and the emendations suggested
are numerous. Since (S has x^P^^ ■'"'^'' <t>^p<^v tQv vwoTeTayfiivuv, and
&y;=(popov in ^^ 2 K. 2333, Boe. read '1JI ib'jjjd n^*^, Thenius the same
with u^'^■^-\r^ "the subject people " for annn, and SBOT. (on K.) with
a^^jnn for onnn. Ki. Koni. reads there and here onyn -\z'h-q na'^ after
#, which has "cities" for onn. Kau. following Kamp. . . . Na icnd -13*7
Abgeschen von dem was einkam von . . . Bn. suggests (Dnj,'?)n iD'i'xa
'd S31 nnnoni ungerechnet die Abgaben der (Stadte ?) imd der Handler
und der Konige, etc. — anj?] Arabia i K. 3iyn. The former is read in
I K. by Bn., Ki., SBOT. (notes), et al. — d^kod onnom] i K. n^Sj-in inDDi.
— 'M^ ani a''N''3a] an addition of the Chronicler. — 15. Liin-i'^] wanting
in I K. io'8. — 16. mxD cS::'] i K. 10" D'jd ra'Sc The text of Ch. is
correct, as the foregoing mxn cs* shows. Gold was reckoned in
shekels (Bn.). — 17. nino] substituted as more familiar for ifliD in i K.
ID'S. — 18. a^nxn nddS ann 1:031] i K. lo'' mnxn noaS '?ijj; CN-n. The
original text of K. as seen in (6 was probably mns'D ND3S a-<hiy ^rxm
(SBGT.) and the throne had at its back the heads of bulls (calves).
So essentially Ki., Bn., et al., after Geiger, Urschrift, p. 343. The
change in K. to round top was made because calves were offensive as
symbols of Yahweh. In Ch. "lambs" (i^'^s) was substituted, which
later was read footstool (vij) (BDB.) and mnND was read onnsD
(Hoph. part.). (S^^ omits the clause, though retained in (6^, Kal
i-KowbSiov vir^6r]K€v iv xpu(7y Ttp 6p6v(p. — 19. nsScn] i K. lO-" ni3^DD.
^20. 103] I K. io2' + N*?. — 21. Dim nny Dj; tt'itt'in nioSn ^SD'7 nvjx '3]
I K. io22 D"\''n ^jN oy 0^2 nSoS t^w^n ijn ^3. — nvm nj^nn] i K. ijn Nun.
— niNtt'j] I K. Pum. — 22. nc3ni] i K. lo^^ nnsnSi. — 23. 13SD] wanting in
l| of I K. io2^, but given in (H, and hence to be read (Bn., Bur., but not
Ki. and SBOT.).— 25. On vv. 25-28 cf. ii4-iv. Before >7\>^ i K. lo^s has
Dicnoi 331 nDSty t)D!<"'i, which the Chronicler omits here, but uses else-
where, cf V*. — ni33iDi . . . iH'i] I K. 231 rnxn jjmsi i^k iS n^i. The
text of Ch., and Solomon had four thousand stalls of horses, is that of
360 2 CHRONICLES
(S in K., and according to Bur. was probably the original there, but
ni:33ici was i3r">cS, yet (& of K. may be suspected of having come under
the influence of Ch. Moreover, close verbal agreement shovv-s that the
Chronicler here followed i K. 56, i33-(':'? D'DiD p^•\t^ tfa D^yaiN nn'^^''^ ••nii,
as his source {v. notes on i""). This reading, except in the final pron.
suf. (ODio'^), has the support of (&-^^ (certainly original ^), the under-
lying Heb. of which was doubtless the original of Ch., and should be
rendered, and Solo7}wn had 40,000 stalls of horses for the chariots. —
DHTi] I K. io=« cnjM. The former has the support of all Vrss. — 26.
wanting in Heb. of i K., but present there in (^. The verse is taken
either from a different text of i K. 10, or from i K. 5'" (4^''') with the
subject omitted (i K. r\-'Ti nc'^'j'i for inn) and co'^cn the kings sub-
stituted for nij'^tsn the kingdoms. — 28. ns'^-.r'S Dnsc3 o^DiD d^n'Sici] i K.
io28 anx-DD nc'^::''? "wn d^didh nsici. The final phrase, mxnN.i Son, is
the Chronicler's happy generalisation of the somewhat obscure passage
in K. (see i'^'').
29-31. The final summary of the reign of Solomon. — Taken
with variations from i K. ii^'-". The variations are as follows:
The acts are called the first and the last, which qualifying phrase is
added frequently by the Chronicler to the summaries taken from
Kings ((/. 1215 i5n 2034 2526 26" 28=6 35"). Their written source is
not "the book of the acts of Solomon," the one given in i K. ii^',
but the acts of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Akijah the
Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the
son of Nebat. These sources were not independent works, but were
either sections of the canonical books or of the Book of Kings
mentioned elsewhere (see Intro, p. 22). Nathan the prophet appears
at the beginning of Solomon's reign (i K. i), Ahijah near its close
(i K. 1 1" a), hence in the acts or history of Nathan and in the
prophecy of Ahijah we probably have references to i K. Whether
this is so in the vision of Iddo the seer is more doubtful. This may
refer to the Chronicler's other source {cf. 12'* 13"); yet the un-
known prophet of I K. 13 is called by Josephus Jadon, a name
equivalent to Iddo {Ant. viii. 8, 5), and he may thus have been
knowTi at the time of the Chronicler. — 31. Slept with his fathers]
part of the regular formula with which the compiler of i and 2 K.
closes his account of the reign of each king, denoting either nothing
more than that one had died as his fathers had, or more likely im-
plying association with his fathers in the realm of the dead and
ES. 29-31.] END OF SOLOMON'S REIGN 36 1
thus some condition of future \iie.—And was buried in the city of
David]. Cf. i Cli. 15". This phrase is also a part of the formula
just mentioned.
29. 'ly'] Kt. ■'^y.:, Qr. ny.;.— 30. nohvf •\ha^^^] for the longer text of
I K. !!■*- noW -hn ifN D'D'ni. — 31. imnp-i] Pi. instead of Niph. n^pn in
I K. 11''^.
X-XXXVI. THE HISTORY OF JUDAH FROM REHO-
BOAM UNTIL THE EXILE.
In contrast with the author of i and 2 Kings, the Chronicler
ignores the N. kingdom and confines his narrative to the fortunes
of Judah. His most noteworthy additions to the earHer history
are the introduction of prophets and Levites. The former utter
discourses of warning and admonition, and the latter are promi-
nent in events concerning the Temple.
X-XII. The Reign of Rehoboam (c. 937-920 b.c). — The
Chronicler has incorporated into his narrative the entire account of
this reign given in i K. 12'-"- ■^-•* i4-'-2', with the exception of
1421-2% omitted owing to its unfavourable view of the religious con-
dition of Judah under Rehoboam. Chapter 10 is almost a verbatim
duplicate of i K. 12'". The Chronicler's additions to his material
from I K. in c. 11 are accounts (a) of Rehoboam's fortifications
(ii5'2), (b) of the immigration from the N. tribes (ii'^-i?), and (c)
of the royal family (ii's-^s). (5) appears to be based upon i K. 12",
but (a) and (c) are independent of i K. and may represent other
sources. In c. 12 the Chronicler gives much fuller detail re-
specting the invasion of Shishak — first, in reference to its cause, the
religious defection of Rehoboam and his people (12' '■); and sec-
ondly, in giving an account of the invading host (123); and thirdly,
in introducing a prophetic admonition whereby through the huxilia-
tion of Rehoboam and the people the wrath of Yahweh is averted
(126-8. 12), The picture thus given of the reign of Rehoboam is
strikingly different from that of i K. There the people are repre-
sented as exxeedingly apostate (i K. 1422-24) and nothing good is
said of Rehoboam. The Chronicler, on the other hand, magnifies
Rehoboam as a builder of cities and as a ruler of ardent worshippers
of Yahweh, only forsaking the law of Yahweh when he was strong,
362
X. 1-19.] REJECTION OF REHOBOAM 363
a supposition necessary to explain the invasion of Shishak, from
whom the land was correspondingly delivered upon the humiliation
of the King and his princes.
X. Rehoboam's rejection by Israel at Shechem. — An almost
verbatim duplicate of i K. 12'-''. — 1. Shechem] mod. Nahlus,
lying under the north-east base of Mt. Gerizim (Baed.^ pp. 215 ff.),
mentioned frequently in the early narratives of Israel (Gn. 12s
2)Z^^ 35^ 37 '^'^' ^^ <^^-)- The assembly of tribes here shows that in spite
of the intervening reign of Solomon the N. tribes held still to their
ancient right of choosing their sovereign, exercised in the case of
Saul and David (i S. ii^ 2 S. 5' i Ch. ii'). — 2. This verse, already
dislocated in Kings, properly precedes v. ' {v. i.). The Chronicler
mentions Jeroboam without introduction, assuming his readers
acquainted with the particulars of i K. ii^s «-, which he has omitted
{y. V. '*). The report which Jeroboam heard was of the death of
Solomon. — 3. And they sent and called him] (wanting in (| of i K.
12^) a necessary connecting gloss for the present arrangement of
the verses in i K. 121-3. — 4^ xhe service and the yoke were the re-
quired revenue (i K. 5' (4")) and the forced labour (i K. 5"^-
("«'), neither of which is mentioned in Chronicles. — 10. My little
finger, etc.]. This proverb-like expression and that of the following
verse mean: I have the will and the power to oppress you more
severely than my father did. — 11. Whips]. The whip was in Eg^'pt
an emblem of royalty (EBi. IV. col. 5300). — Scorpions] probably
the name given to a whip whose lash was furnished with sharp
pieces of metal. — 13. And the king answered them roughly]. Such
folly shows how thoroughly Rehoboam was permeated with the
feelings of an Oriental despot, and how little he understood the
weakness of the hold of the house of David upon the N. tribes. —
15. His word which he spake by Ahijah]. Cf. i K.ii''^-, a narra-
tive not given in Chronicles, and yet thus assumed to be known. —
16. We have no share in David, and no part in Jesse's son : each to
thy tents, O Israel, now see to thy house, David]. This same cry,
with the exception of the last line, was raised by Sheba in his short-
lived rebellion against David (2 S. 20'). — To their tents] not to
their homes, but to their places of encampment at Shechem. —
17. A verse anticipating subsequent action and thus clearly out
3^4
2 CHRONICLES
of place (wanting in (5 of i K. 12), cither a gloss in Kings or to
be placed after v."".— 18. Adonimm*]. Cf. 1 K. 4' 5^' <"'. This
officer of Solomon's reign probably had quelled dissatisfaction
before, but this time he failed. — Unto this day] in the narrative
of the Chronicler an anachronism (cf. 5'). The Chronicler at
this point, because he is narrating only the history of the S. king-
dom, omits verse 20 of i K. 12, which contains the statement
that Jeroboam was made king by the N. tribes.
1. no3t?] I K. 12' cyy. — in3] i K. n^. — 2. In (&^^ of K. this verse is
found in I K. 11 between v. "" and v. "b^ with the addition in (&^, "he
returned (?) and went to his city Sareira which is in Mt. Ephraim."
Hence as it now stands it should precede v. 1 (3ur.), and is so printed in
St. SBOT. After Nin i K. 12= has 1J^1y.— a^nxca . . . 3tt';i] i K.
DnsK3 . . . 2ty^^ The former is the true reading (Ki. BH.). — 3.
hn-\Z'> So] I K. 123 Ssnii''' '^np ^j. — 4. Before n.-iy i K. i2« has nns. —
5. Before iiy i K. 128 has isS, which after (6 should be inserted (Ki.
BH.). Instead of ^y;< -'-; the Vrss. in both K. and Ch. read ~i>:. — 6.
ntn nj'^] i K. 12^ n:n D;'n .-in. — 7. Before n^nn 05 and i K. 12' have ovn,
which should be inserted (Ki. SiJ.).— 2iaS] i K. lay. — D;'n''] retention
of n of article {cf. Ges. § 35«)) other examples 25'" 29'^. — on^xni] i K.
D.-i-Ji'i ama?i. — 8, i K. 128 has wrongly "v.^'N before ann>'n {cf. St.
• SBOT., Bur.).— 10. 1-s'] i K. i2'<' vSn.— aj:'^] i K. + nrn.— -i-n.-^]
I K. •\2-\r\. — ^japtl Tfi';'^ Ki. BH., Ges. § 93(7. {cf. Bur. i K. 12'°). —
nay] i K. 12'° Dt. 3215 ■\. — 11. D'::;-i] in BDB. corrigenda, p. 1126
(770'').— On the art. in a'av.ra and a'3-^|->;3 cf. Dav. Syn. § 21 {d).—
•'3X1-] I K. i2'i + a^PN iD>s. — 12. N3^i] I K. 1 2'2 erroneously 13^1. —
13. 'n aji'M] I K. 1213 ajrn rs I'^^rn j;"'- — ^^^'P] harsh response, cf. Gn.
42'- 30 (pi.) I S. 20"'. — D>3m -t^zr^} wanting in i K. — After copm i K.
has inxyi iii'n. — 14. i'3Dn ns] thus Ki. BH. after the Bomberg Bible,
a reading confirmed by ^-^^S B. Ginsburg and Baer and Delitzsch have
n'33N after many mss. The sense, the parallel, and v. '" require the
former. — v*?]?] i K. 1214 ao'^j? S;. — After ^jn i K. has B3nN id^n. — 15.
n3Dj f] I K. i2'5 n3D f. In late Rabbinic Hebrew nsp = cause
(Bur.). — O'lnSsn] i K. nin>. — mni in i K. is wanting after cpn, but
appears after -13-1. — 16. In i K. 12I6 the verse commences with Ss nim
instead of ''31, and has an':'N instead of an'^'. After i'^-dhs i k. has i3n.
— U'ls] wanting in i K., perhaps a dittography from the preceding ''tt". —
^3=] wanting in i K. — 17. SNn'.:'> ij3i] casus pendens before waw consec.
{cf I K. 9"') (Dr. TH. 127 (a), Dav. Syn. § 49 {b), Ges. §§ iiiA,
i43£f). — 18. B-nn] i K. i2'8 a-ns, but CS^S ^, have a->^nN, given also in
I K. 46 528, hence without doubt correct (Ki. HB.).—'Z'> >J3] x K. '^:i
XI. 1-23.] VARIOUS ACTS OF REHOBOAM 365
'::". — The Chronicler omits i K. 12=", since he does not write of the
fortunes of the N. kingdom.
XL 1-4. Rehoboam dissuaded from attacking Israel. —
With very slight variations from i K. 12"-' --^, which belongs to the
latest strata of the book. — 1. A hundred and eighty thousand] a
small number compared with those elsewhere in 2 Ch. reckoned to
the S. kingdom: under Abijah 400,000 (13'), under Asa 580,000
(i4^("), under Jehoshaphat 1,160,000 (ly"''). — 2. Shemaiah]
mentioned also in 12= ', giving a reproof and a promise of deliver-
ance in connection with the invasion of Shishak; and his words
in 1 2 "5 as a source of the history of Rehoboam.
1. n''a hn] I K. i22> no '^3 rs. — ^C'jai] i K. pen toar nsi. —
''NT.;'"] I K. '^Niw'i no. — no'^rrrn] i K. nsi'^cn. — oyam'^] followed in
I K. by nD'?^' p. — The Chronicler has thus, without impairing the narra-
tive, shortened this verse by the omission of five words. — 2. mni] i K.
12" D'n'^Nn, but some MSB. and the Vrss. have nini in i K., preferred by
Ki. BH., St. SBOT.^3. '2 Ssiiy^ Sd] i K. 1223 min^ n>a S3. The
Chronicler frequently uses the term Israel in reference to the S. kingdom,
cf. i2'-6 15" 212-'' 2819- "_ — pc^j^i] r K. + D;'n in^i. — 4. DTna] i K.
12=' + '^NTj'i •'ja. — D>'3T' Sn pdSc] I K. nin^ 1313 pdSS.
5-23. Rehoboam's prosperity. — This section, independent of
I K., falls into three well-defined paragraphs all of which are either
from the pen of the Chronicler (H-J.) or from three sources
(Bn., Ki.).
Vv. 6-'2 may be regarded as either from the Chronicler (Kau., H-J.)
or from an uncanonical source (Bn.), the Chronicler's pre-midrashic fore-
runner annotated in v.'" by the insertion of m Judah and Benjamin
(Ki.). These words, since all the cities enumerated are in Judah {cf. in
Judah in v. ^), if the material is older than the Chronicler, are a gloss.
Benjamin did not historically belong to the S. kingdom, but through the
incorporation of its territory into the S. kingdom after the fall of Samaria
the tribe was later reckoned as having originally sided with Judah, and
this view appears in i K. ii"' (not ^■) 122'- -3. Linguistically these verses
belong to the Chronicler and he may well be regarded as their author.
This likewise is true of the remainder of the chapter, although vv. '^ 23
are assigned by Ki. to another source representing material of historical
worth. For marks of the Chronicler cf. ni;?l T'j; Vdi (1. 124) r\^~\7h (1.
134) V. '2; u'lm (1. 20), mr Hiph. (1. 30) v. '<; nsy Hiph. (1. 89) vv,
■6- 22; 3S j.-^j (1. 78) T. '6; srj? (1. 76) vv. 21. 23; construction of sen-
tence (11. 117, 129) V. 22; 3-1^ (1. 105) v. 23.
366
2 CHRONICLES
5-12. Rehoboam's fortification of cities. — These cities were
on the roads to Egypt, or on the western hills of the Judaean
Shephelah, and hence were fortified as a protection against Egypt,
and in view of the invasion of Shishak the record of their fortifica-
tion may well have historical foundation. Compared with the
frontier cities fortified by Solomon (i K. gisb.n.is)^ ([^Qy illustrate
the shrunken condition of Rehoboam's kingdom (GAS. /. II. p.
89). Winckler (KATj p. 241) holds that their building, i.e.,
rebuilding, was occasioned through their destruction in insur-
rections at the time of Rehoboam's accession. 6. Beth-lehem].
Cf. I Ch. 2^K—'Etam]. Cf. 1 Ch. ^\—Teko'a\ Cf. i Ch. ^K~
7. Beth-zur]. Cf. i Ch. 2*K—Soco]. Cf. 28^^ Jos. 15^5 i s. 17'.
A town in the Shephelah, mod. es-Suweke, south-southeast from
Beth-shemesh (Rob. BR.^ I. p. 494, n. 7; Buhl, GAP. p. 194;
BDB.), to be distinguished from the Soco of i Ch. 4'8. — Adidlam]
the fortress mentioned in the history of David (i S. 22'), clearly
in the Shephelah (Ne. ii^" Mi. i'^), conjectured the hill 'Aid-
el-ma oflf the Wady es Sur (GAS. HGHL. p. 229), otherwise
not identified. — 8. Galh\ Cf. 1 Ch. i8>. Gath can scarcely
have belonged to Judah at the time of Rehoboam, since at the
time of Solomon it had its own king (i K. 2"), and it probably
remained Philistine until its destruction, c. 750 (Am. 6=), occasioned
not unlikely by Uzziah (26^), but whoever wrote 9=^ had placed
Philistia under Solomon. — Mareshah]. Cf. i Ch. 2*2. — Zipli].
Cf I Ch. 2*\ 9. Adoraim-^] mod. DUra west of Hebron. — ■
Lachish] a notable frontier town frequently mentioned (cf. Jos.
10 Mi. I '3 2 K. 18''), mod. Tell-el-Hesy, recently excavated,
thirty-three miles south-west from Jerusalem, and east from Gaza
(Baed.« p. 118).— Azekah] Jos. io'» '• 15" i S. 17' Je. 34' Ne.
11=" f, not identified. — 10. Zoreah] Jos. 15" 19" Ju. i^^ « 16"
i8-- « " Ne. ii"t) mod. Sara, fifteen miles west of Jerusalem
(BDB.).— Aijalon]. Cf i Ch. 6» ^^^K— Hebron]. Cf 1 Ch. 3'
64 0 (55) 42 (5 7) jji, — /^ J iidak cttd in Benjamin]. All of the above-
mentioned cities are in Jiiduh, except Zorah and Aijalon, which
were in the territory of Dan (Jos. 19^''); hence it has been
assumed that these later came into the possession of Benjamin
(Ke., Zoe., Oe.), but the words are a comprehensive term for
XI. 1-23.1 VARIOUS ACTS OF REHOBOAM 367
the S. kingdom. They are held by some to be a gloss {v. s.). —
11 f. This picture of fortresses victualled and garrisoned through-
out the land seems to imply that they were intended to keep Judah
in subjection (y. s. Winckler) and to justify the rendering of the
last clause and so Judah and Benjamin became his (Ba.), but we
prefer the view that they were fortified as a protection against
Egypt.
6. pM] in the meaning of rebuilt, fortified (cf. 1 Ch. 11'). — 10.
nmso i-i;'] cities of ramparts, walls, in v. " i2« 21^ sg. 14', without "i^y
II" and Is. 293 Na. 2' '2) ? -j-. — n. pnxNi] a construct governing the
three following nouns. For example of two nouns cf. i Ch. 13'. — 12.
-\^'•;^ -|ij; Sd^i] idiomatic with the Chronicler. Cf. i Ch. 26'^ Qes. § 123c
(1. 124). — IN?: n3-\n'^] Ges. § 113^.
13 17. The immigration to Judah. — 13. And the priests and
Levltes that were in all Israel coming out of all their territory took
their stand with him]. Faithful servants of Yahweh, from the
Chronicler's point of view, would necessarily side with Rehoboam.
■ — 14. Their open lands] the land round the Levitical cities in
which the community had common rights and which according to
P was never to be sold (Lv. 25" Nu. 352-5, ^y_ j ch. 6" ^^^^). — And
their possessions] i.e., their other landed property in cities, includ-
ing houses, which also were an inalienable possession of the Le-
vites, although not of other Israelites (Lv. 2529-3^). The priests and
Levites thus appear making full sacrifice in leaving their former
homes. — For Jeroboam, etc.]. This fact is stated negatively in i K.
1231, a passage which may have suggested this entire paragraph.
The emphasis appears to be on unto Yahweh, which is entirely
wrong from the historical point of view, since Jeroboam did not
repudiate the worship of Yahweh. — His sons] i.e., his successors
(Be., Zoe., Oe.). — 15. The Chronicler regarded the schism of Jer-
oboam in the worship of Yahweh as an entirely idolatrous move-
ment. A polemic against the Samaritans and the newly founded
temple at Gerizim has been seen in this passage (Tor. AJSL.
XXV. 1909, p. 201).— The high places] (^\^t22)■ The word primarily
meant " heights," any conspicuous elevation of the country or land-
scape (cf. Dt. 32'3 Is. 58'* Am. 4'^ Mi. i'), then (both sing, and pi.)
a place of worship, of Yahweh as well as other gods (i S. g'^-^^
368
2 CHRONICLES
iqs. 13 I K. 3' 22<* 2 K. 15"); after the Deuteronomic reform high
places came to mean not only an unlawful place of worship,
but one entirely dedicated to the service of other gods. The
Chronicler pjrobably thus used the word here and elsewhere (cf.
142(3). 4(5) 1^17 176 2o'3 21" 28«« 3H 32'2 S3^-"-^^ 34=)- — And for
the he-goats] (□''"l^y li^) a term applied to the demons (Arabic
jinn) popularly believed to inhabit desert and waste places, not as
pure spirits, but in corporeal form, ordinarily represented as hairy
(hence goat-like) (WRS. Religion of the Semites,^ p. 120) {cf Is.
13" 34" Lv. 17'). The epithet applied by the Chronicler in re-
proach to Jeroboam's innovations has the stigma of our term devils.
A connection with an Egyptian god Pan and a borrowing from
Egypt (Ke., Zoe., H-J.) are not probable. — And the calves] the two
golden calves set up by Jeroboam at Bethel and Dan as symbols of
Yahweh (i K. 12"- ^■). This symbolism probably was derived
from the Canaanites, among whom the bull was the symbol of Baal
(Bn. EBi. I. col. 632). — 16. All who were loyal to Yahweh in the
N. kingdom are represented as having followed the example of the
priests and Levites in going to Jerusalem, not simply to sacrifice,
but, as the strengthening of the kingdom shows, to remain perma-
nently.— 17. Three years]. The reason of this limitation is due to
the invasion of Shishak in the fifth year of King Rehoboam (cf.
12- 1 K. 14"). This invasion, from the Chronicler's point of view,
must have been caused by some religious delinquency of Reho-
boam and his people (cf. 12'), and this delinquency, introducing at
once a weakening of the kingdom, naturally falls in the fourth year
of Rehoboam immediately preceding the invasion, and thus only
three years are left for obedience and increase in strength. — In the
way of David and of Solomon]. The Chronicler ignores completely
the apostasies of Solomon. In i K. ii*-« Solomon is placed in con-
trast to David.
14. Dn^jtn] in Hiph. only in Ch. with meaning to reject, 1 Ch. 28^ 2 Ch.
29*' (1. 30). in^jT.sn with meaning to give a stench (Is. 19^) is probably
from another root, though of same radicals (BDB.). — 17. i;'^n] (g sg.
18-23. The royal family.
This section is entirely independent of i K. and its source and histor-
ical value are necessarily entirely conjectural. B-i. assigns it aus der
XI. 18-23.] REHOBOAM'S FAMILY 369
andern Vorlage von Chronislen, and Ki. to the ancient material " for the
most part of good historical value." It is extremely probable that
Rehoboam was of luxurious habits and that he followed his father in the
possession of a considerable harem. The memory of this, with the names
of some of his wives and children, may have long continued and been
recorded, or the names may have been invented by the Chronicler.
18 f. And Rehoboam took to himself a wife, Mahalath the
daughter of Jerimoth the son of David, and^ of Abihail the daughter
of Eliab the son of Jesse] {v. i.). — Jerimoth] not mentioned among
the sons of David's wives (cf. 2 S. 32-5 51^-16 i Ch. 3'-3 i4*-')> hence
either the son of a concubine or possibly Jerimoth (niD"'"!"') is a
corruption of Ithre am (D^iri''), who was one of the sons of David
(i Ch. 3'). — Abihail] not mentioned elsewhere; for other occur-
rences of the name cf. i Ch. 2". — Eliab] David's eldest brother
(i S. i6« ly). — 19. These three sons are not mentioned again. —
Jeush]. Cf. I Ch. y". — Shemariah], Cf. i Ch. 125. — Zaham-\]. —
20. Maacah the daughter of Absalom] probably granddaughter,
since Tamar is mentioned as his only daughter (2 S. 14"). Cf.
132, where, according to the true text, Ma'acah is called the
daughter of Uriel. — Of the three sons, except in the case of Abijah
(cf i2'») and the daughter, nothing further is known. The name
'Altai appears among the descendants of the Judahite Sheshan
(i Ch. 2^5) and a Gadite (i Ch. 12"). — Ziza] the name also
of a Simeonite (i Ch. 4"t), probably a childish reduplicated
abbreviation or a term of endearment (Noeldeke, EBi. III. col.
3294). — Shelomith] apparently also a son, since the name oc-
curs of men, Levites (i Ch. 23S'2'-'8 26"Q'^-28)| head of a post-
exilic family (Ezr. 8'°); of women, the mother of a blasphemer
(Lv. 24"), a daughter of Zerubbabel (i Ch. 3''). — 21. Sixty con-
cubines] thirty, according to (^^ and Josephus, Ant. viii. 10, i.
This is preferred as original by Bn. — 23. And he dealt wisely] in
the policy which he pursued of scattering his sons and giving them
an abundant maintenance and also a considerable number of
wives. This would be conducive to their contentment and a
preventive of rebellion against their brother (but the text may
not be sound, v. i.).
18. p] read n3 with Qr., (&, H. — '?>n''3N] read S^n^^Nl after (S* (so
Be., Kg., c/ al. generally), since only one wife of Rehoboam is meant, as is
24
370 2 CHRONICLES
shown by the sing. ntt'N and i?ni of v. '». — 21. nb'j] late usage, cf. 13M
243 Ezr. 92 '2 10" Ne. 13=3 Ru. i* (BDB.).— 22, lo^^cnS >o] either an
example of a peculiar sentence without verb (1. 117), or more probably
the verb given in <S SiecoctTo (3!;'n) has been omitted from the text, and
should be restored (Kau., Bn., Ki. B.B., et al. generally). — 23. p"i]
wanting in (&. — insM] from X~\D with the doubtful meaning of to distrib-
lUe (BDB.), (&^^, Kal v^^V^V, as though ',"\d had here the meaning to
spread abroad, increase {cf. i Ch. 4'*). (B^ conflates two renderings and
introduces a subject Kal T]v^Ti6r] A^ia Kal 5i^Ko\p€. H renders 'v\ pM
quia sapientior fuit et potentior super oynnes Jilios eJ2<5 connecting with
the preceding verse. — nj? S^'^] <& 'ij? Sd*?!, so Ki. SBOT., Kom., BH.
— a"'a'j psn '?{<;;'m] F. Perles, Analekten Textkritik des ATs. p. 47,
C'j'j onS NSTM. This emendation is accepted by Ki. BH. — The text of these
verses'"- =^' is certainly doubtful. Winckler reconstructs them (KAT.-
pp. 241 /.), v. " VJ3 S33 wSDnS r\y;o p n>3N cniS iCyii, Aiid he ap-
pointed Abia the son of Maacah chief in order to make him king from
among all his sons. As S'nt head of the family (BDB. cni 3. f),
Abijah is appointed during the life of his father his successor on the
throne. (It is not necessary to look to the Assyrian w.'\ reStu as Winck-
ler does to draw this conclusion.) The words vnxa n^jj*^ are a gloss.
The meaning of v. =3^ according to Winckler, has been distorted through
the insertion from v. - of viZ 'rj:;. It properly belongs with ■w. ^-'-.
Winckler renders Utui er haute und zerstorte in alien Gebieten Jiidas
tend Benjamins (alle) die festen Stddte und er tat hinein Vorrdte in
Alenge. The last clause of v. =3, a^^*: ]^r:n '^n-j'm, speaks of the King's
own wives and goes with v. ='. On the whole, however, it is better to
accept the emendation of Perles.
XII. 1-12. The invasion of Shishak. — An enlargement of the
narrative of i K. i4"-28. The additions are vv.'-'"*- '- {v. s.).
(These additions are marked by Ki. as from a Midrash, yet it is
allowed that they may have been written by the Chronicler.). —
1. When the kingdom of Rehoboam was established and he was
strong] i.e., during the first three years of Rehoboam's reign (cf.
II"), he forsook the law of Yahweh]. This, from the Chronicler's
point of view, was a necessary antecedent to the invasion of Shishak.
— Attd all Israel]. Cf. ii'. — 2. Shishak] Shoshenk, the first
Pharaoh of the twenty-second dynasty. The results of this invasion
are inscribed on the temple at Kamak, where a list of some one
himdred and eighty to\Mis captured by Shishak is given. These
belong to northern Israel as well as Judah, showing that he
exacted tribute there even if he only used violence in the king-
Xn. 1-16.] INVASION OF SHISHAK 371
dom of Rehoboam (Max Muller, EBi. IV. col. 4486). The
occasion of this invasion was probably the weakened condition
of Israel through the disruption of the kingdom; and Jero-
boam, since he had sought refuge in Egypt (i K. 11^°), may
have directly solicited such an interference against Judah. — For
they had transgressed against Yahweh] an addition to i K. 14",
and a characteristic touch of the Chronicler, who thus accounts
for the invasion. Cf. i Ch. lo'^. — 3. With twelve hundred chariots
and sixty thousand horsemen; and the people were without number].
These statements are of the magnifying character of the Jewish
Midrash. Kings gives no such detail. For similar exaggerations
cf. 133 149 17" ff-. — Luhim] the Libyans of northern Africa,
west of Egypt. They repeatedly invaded Egypt and mingled
with the people and supplied the Pharaohs with a militia. Shishak
was of this race. They are also mentioned in 16^ Na. 3^ Dn. 11"
and (Can^) Gn. lo's i Ch. i". — Sukkiyim'\] not yet satis-
factorily explained. Ci», Iff, have Troglodytes, cave-dwellers, hence
probably the cave-dwellers of the mountains on the west coast of the
Red Sea (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba. ?); from derivation from booth,
"dwellers in booths" (Ki.). Spiegelberg {Mgyptolog. Rand-
glossen z. AT.) identifies them with the Tktin, who were used as
police troops in the nineteenth dynasty. — And CusJiites] the
Ethiopians, the inhabitants of Cush, a general name for the dis-
trict lying south of Egypt proper, cf. Am. 9^ The Libyans and
Cushites are mentioned among the allies of Egypt in Na. 3 \ — 4.
The fortified cities]. Cf. iv«-. — 5. Shemaiah the prophet]. Cf.
1 12 ff-. This episode is not mentioned in Kings. — You have forsaken
me and I indeed have forsaken you in the hand of Shishak]. Cf. 15^.
— 6. Humbled themselves] i.e., they fasted and put on sackcloth;
cf. I K. 21"- 29 — Princes of Israel] in v. = princes of Judah. —
Righteous is Yahweh]. Cf. Ex. 9" Dn. 9'^ — 7. In a short time].
Thus taynO is to be rendered (RVm., Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba., Ki.),
and not some or small deliverance (RV., Kau.). — And my wrath
shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem] i.e., the city shall not be de-
stroyed, cf. 34". — 8. But they will be his servants] in contrast to
the destruction which they will escape. This service will be of
short duration (v.'). — That they may know, etc.] i.e., that they may
372 2 CHRONICLES
distinguish between the two services and recognise that the service
of Yahweh is not so oppressive as that of foreign kings (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Ba.). The lands here refers to foreign countries. —
9-11. The narrative from i K. 14"*- commenced in v. ^ is now
resumed. — 9. Shields of gold]. Cf. 9'^ '-. — 10. Guard] Hterally
runners; a term appHed to a body-guard (cf. 1 S. 22'^ i K. i^) and
hence to the royal guard connected with the palace and the
Temple. — 11. The purpose of the shields made by Solomon is here
explained. — 12. This verse is from the Chronicler, an echo of v. '.
The good things which were found in Judah are piety and fidelity
to Yahweh, on account of which Judah was not destroyed (cf. 19').
1. 3T"] simple perf. after a clause or expression of time, cf. vv. ^- "
158* 2o> 21" 24*- 23 Ne. i« Zc. 7' Ez. I' 20' 26' 291' 302" et al. Koe. iii.
§ 370b.— 2. nSj'] cf. V. I. — pr^r] so also Qr. in i K. 14^5, but Kt. pz'^z',
also (S ^ovffaKei/i. This latter is without doubt correct after the
Egyptian Sosenq. — 5. "inaiy] prophetic pf., Dr. TH. 13,-7. . . . mN-\3i
n«n] 'HM might be expected in one clause or the other, cf. v.'; see
Dr. TH. p. 157 f.n., Ges. § iiib. — na^Sa'?] ace. with V, Ges. § iijn.
— 9. hp^] a modification of nSy in v. - i K. 14^5 agreeable to the con-
text.— ^JJD nx] 1 K. 14=6 'd ^o PN. — 10, 11. The rendering of 10^ and
lib in d is singular and without ready explanation, Kai Kar^crTTjcrev e^'
avrbv ^ovaaKelfj. S.pxovTas, etc., (ii'') eicreiropeiiovro oi (pnXdcraavres Kai
ol iraparpixovTes Kai ol iiri(rTp4<f)0VTei eis airavTifffLV rC)v ira.parp€xi>vrwv.
(&^ follows i^ in io'> and has both (& and the addition 'ui din^ji in ii^.
— 11. DiNrji D'i-in 1N3] I K. 14-8 a^s-in DIN'.:"'. — 12. Cf. for constr. v.'.
— n^ncnV] inf. continuing finite verb, Ges. § 114^, Ew. § 351 c at end.
13-16. The chronology and sources of the reign of Reho-
boam. — 13. And King Rehoboam strengthened liimselfin Jerusalem
and reigned]. These words from the Chronicler indicate Reho-
boam's recovery of authority after the invasion of Shishak. — 14.
Because he did not set his heart to seek Yahweh]. This phrase from
the Chronicler occurs, in the positive form, of Jehoshaphat 19' and
of Hezekiah 30", and of Ezra with the law as the object Ezr. 7'°.
— 15. A modification of i K. 14" after the usual manner of
Chronicles, cf. 9^9 i Ch. 2929. — The words of Shemaiah the prophet
and Iddo the seer]. Cf. 9"; not independent works by these two
men (Ke.) but the reference is to the sections of the main source of
the Chronicler (see Intro. § 6). — In reckoning genealogies] an
Xm. 1-23.] REIGN OF ABIJAH ^y^
obscure phrase either defining in some way the character or contents
of the source just mentioned (Ke., Zoe.) as containing a genealogi-
cal register (Oe.), or the title of the work of Iddo (Ba.), or a copy-
ist's blunder, really belonging with the meaning in order to be
enrolled in the genealogies at the close of ii'« (Be. after Hitz.), or
a meaningless phrase arising from some textual corruption (Bn.),
or in the wrong place from a copyist's error, and to be struck out
(Ki. Kom.). — And the wars of Rehoboam and Jeroboam were con-
stant] (lit. all the days) condensed from i K. 143°. — 16. Taken
with abridgment (v. i.) from i K. 14". — Abijah] the true
name of the son of Rehoboam, called in Kings Abijam, possibly to
avoid confusion with Abijah the son of Jeroboam mentioned in i
K. 14' (Bur.), or to avoid connecting name of Yahweh (iT' jah)
with so godless a king (Bn. ?), or a euphonic change of the ending
ah (Ki.): the real reason remains obscure.
13. •'d] introduces the quotation from i K. 14^"', but is superfluous
and not according to usage elsewhere. — 14. j?in b'>"i] from i K. 14^2
opening words, but with n-nni as subj. (& of K. has Rehoboam as subj.
— 15. ti'n\nnS] either inf. of purpose defining the words of Iddo, or with
S of inscription giving their title (Ba.), or text error or corruption. (B^,
Kal irpd^eis avroO, VK'jJDi, perhaps favors this last. ^^ has in addition
Tov yeveaXoyijcrai, 15 et deligenter exposita, with reference to the acts of Re-
hoboam.— -Dya-in Dvam niDn'^Di] i K. 1430 av^ii ^^y oyam pa nn^n nnnSci.
— ninnSn, naia] each followed by two genitives, c/". 11' i Ch. 13' Ges.
§ 128a. — a^3''n So] pred. of copula understood, Koe. iii. § 426k. — -16. In
I K. 143' after i3P'i|| has r.naN cj?and after T'n it has nijcyn ncyj tcN Ofi;
but the latter is wanting in (&^^, which furnishes the probably true text
of Kings.
XIII. 1- 23. The reign of Abijah (r. 920-917 B.C.).— This King
reigned, according to i K. 15^, only three years, and in the brief
narrative of i K. (15'-^) Abijah (Abijam) is known only as a ruler
" walking in all the sins of his father " and spared only for David's
sake. The Chronicler gives no inkling of this evil character, but
on the basis of the statement that there was war between Abijah
and Jeroboam (i K. 15') depicts him as a great victor over the N.
kingdom "because his people relied upon Yahweh" (v. '8)^ and
his short reign is made one of great glory.
374 2 CHRONICLES
Ki. after Bn. assigns w. '-2° to M, v. ^i to ancient material of historical
value, and only vv. ■''■ -^^ to the Chronicler. The whole chapter, however,
may well be regarded as coming from the Chronicler with use of canonical
material in vv. '-2- "a. The Chronicler's style appears throughout, cf.
inf. with S V. '; pinnn (1. 38) v. ''; h with inf. after icn (1. 4) v. s; pij-ixn inv
(1. 97) V. '; the detailed ritual v. " (cf. 2= S'^ i Ch. 23''); nnxxna onxxnn
(1. 44) V. '^ (cf. I Ch. 15=0; no TiT (1. 92) V. 20; aaS •]•\^ nyj v. ' (c/. i Ch.
22' 29') (Graf, GB. p. 137).
1-2. Introduction. — From i K. 15' f- '^ — 1. /w the eighteenth
year of King Jeroboam] the only example where the Chronicler has
given a synchronism from Kings. — 2. Ma'dcah*]. Cf. ii^^ i K. 15=.
Micaiah of the Heb. Text, elsewhere a man's name, is clearly an
error. — The daughter of Uriel]. In 11=" i K. 152 Maacah is the
daughter of Absalom (Abishalom i K. 15=), hence either Uriel was
the husband of Tamar, the daughter of Absalom, and thus Maacah
was his granddaughter (Ke., Be., Zoe., Oe., Ba.), or a confusion has
arisen between Maacah the mother of Asa (i K. i^^"- '^), who really
was the daughter of Uriel, and Maacah the daughter of Absalom,
the mother of Abijah (Bn. after Thenius, also Ki., who thinks of
two Maacahs, but holds that the wife of Rehoboam was the
daughter of Uriel, and that this statement of the text is "a good
ancient piece of information"). In all probability there was only
one Maacah {cf. 11 -°-"and 15'^). — Uriel]. Be. thought possibly the
same as the Levite mentioned in i Ch. 155- ", but all is obscure in
regard to him; neither can it be determined whether Gibeah near
Hebron (Jos. 15", cf. 1 Ch. 2^') or the one of Benjamin is meant. —
And war was between Abijah and Jeroboam]. This clause taken
from I K. IS"* introduces the fine specimen of Midrash which
follows.
3. The assembled armies. — The great numbers 400,000 and
800,000 are characteristic of the Midrash, cf v.'" 14^ 17'^-". The
number, however, of Jeroboam's warriors is the same as that cred-
ited to Israel in the census taken by Joab, while that of Abijah's
army is 100,000 less than that credited to Judah (2 S. 24'). (In i
Ch. 21^ Israel has 1,100,000, and Judah 470,000.) How utterly
unhistorical these numbers are, appears at once when one reflects
upon the small size of the territory of northern Israel and Judah.
The entire population of the country at its maximum can hardly
Xm. 1-23.] REIGN OF ABIJAH 375
ever have been more than four times its present strength of 650,000
souls (EBi. III. col. 3550).
4-12. The address of Abijah. — The appearance of Abijah, who
according to i K. 15^ " walked in all the sins of his father" and was
spared only for David's sake (i K. 15^), as a preacher and ardent
upholder of the Levitical worship of Yahweh is an interesting
touch of the Chronicler, who in this speech especially magnifies
the importance of the Aaronic priesthood and the ceremonial service
according to the priestly law as the source of divine favour and
victory. — 4. Zejnaraim] appears in Jos. 18" among the cities of
Benjamin, mentioned between Beth-arabah and Bethel. This
would not exclude its connection with a hill of the same name in
EpJiniiin, i.e., on its southern boundary. The place is generally
identified with es-Snmra to the north of Jericho (SWP. III.
pp. 174, 212/., Buhl, GAP. p. 180 et al., see DB.). But (according
to Be.) the narrative is not favourable to a location so far east.
This exhortation from the mountain-top resembles, so far, Jotham's
from Mt. Gerizim (Ju. g''^-). — 5. Covenant of salt] i.e., an indissol-
uble covenant. Cf. Nu. 18". The figure is derived from the sacred-
ness of the bond created between parties who have partaken food
together, who say of one another, " There is salt between us " (cf.
Dill, on Lv. 2", Gray on Nu. i8'«, WRS. Rel. Semites", p. 270,
Bn. Arch. p. 91). — 6. The servant of Solomon]. Jeroboam is so re-
ferred to in I K. II". — 7. Worthless men]. Cf. Ju. g* ii^. — Base
fellows] (^y^^ ''12), ERV. sons of Belial, a frequent expression
(Dt. 13'* <"> Ju. 1922 20" I S. 2'2 10" I K. 2I"'- ") but only here in
Chronicles. — Young] ("Ipi) scarcely applicable to Rehoboam at
the age of forty-one (12'=), though this is defended from the use of
the term in i Ch. 22^ 29' i K. y as equivalent to "an inex-
perienced young man " (Ke., Ba.). Others read in 12", twenty-one
instesid oi forty-one (Zoe., Oe.). — Tender-hearted] either timid (cf
Dt. 208) or weak in understanding. The whole picture of the revolt
in this verse is very different from that taken from Kings given in
lo'f •, where Rehoboam appears hard and defiant and brings about
the rupture by his domineering manner. Here the fault is laid en-
tirely on the representatives of Israel, who are characterised as
worthless and base fellows. This view is due to the intensity with
376 2 CHRONICLES
which the Chronicler or his source (Bn.) regards the northern king-
dom as apostate, and the southern with its King as the true people
of Yahweh. In this the Chronicler may have reflected the feeling
of his Jewish contemporaries toward the Samaritans. — 8. In the
hand of the sons of David] therefore the only legitimate kingdom. —
Since ye are a great mrdtitiide, etc. ]. Abi jah thus states the ground
of their confidence, which is baseless because they have not a
proper priesthood (v. ^). — 9. The priests of Yahweh the sons of
Aaron]. According to P, the priesthood was restricted to the sons of
Aaron (Ex. 28*°^- 29^^ 40'- "f- etc.). — And the Levites]. These sub-
ordinate officers are naturally mentioned in connection with the
priests, because their position was equally fixed in the sacred law
(Nu. 35 ff- 8« «• i8« etc.). — After the manner of the peoples of other
lands] who have no chosen or restricted holy priesthood like that of
the tribe of Levi and the house of Aaron. A better contrast, how-
ever, is given in the Greek rendering (preferred by Bn.) from the
people of the land, i.e., from any one, as the remainder of the verse
shows. This also is more agreeable to the statements in i K. 12"
1333. — To consecrate himself] (lit. to fill his hand), a frequent expres-
sion (Ex. 28^' 29'- "• 33. 35 Lv. 833 1632 Ju. 175- '2 I K. 1333 et al.). —
With a young bullock and seven rams] agreeable to the law of Ex.
29" except that there only two rams are prescribed. While the
personnel of this northern priesthood is illegitimate {cf. also i K.
1333), its ritual is described in the main as according to the law. —
No gods]. Cf. Je. 2" 5^ The reference here is to the golden calves
{cf. Ho. 8^). — 10. In contrast to the no gods Yahweh is empha-
sised as the God of Abijah's host, and the sons of Aaron as his min-
istering priests, with the Levites. — In their work]. The term
(ri3S'7D) is used frequently of Levitical and priestly duties. — 11.
The daily services appointed for the worship in the tabernacle are
here enumerated: the morning and evening sacrifices (Ex. 29 ^^^■),
the morning and evening incense of sweet spices (Ex. 30' '•), the
perpetual offering of show-bread (Ex. 25'"), and the lighting each
evening of the lamps of the golden "candlestick" which burned
until the morning (Ex. 253iff- 30? '• 40^^ f- Lv. 248).* — 12, The
* Contrary to the notion of these passages that the lamps were lighted to burn over night,
it has been held that some at least of them were kept burning also during the day, Josephus
Xin. 1-23.] REIGN OF ABIJAH 377
contest is pictured as a holy war. — The trumpets of alarm]. These
are made prominent because by their use, according to Nu. 10%
the people are remembered before Yahweh and delivered from
their enemies. Cf. also Nu. 3i«.
13-20, The success of Abijah's army. — 13, Jeroboam not only
has an army double the size of Abijah's (v.^), but by his strategy
places Judah in additional peril, and thus the divine deliverance
is enhanced. On the form of strategy cf. Jos. 8^ Ju. 20" «•. — 14.
On the blowing of the trumpets cf. v. '=>. — 15. Gave a shotit] i.e.,
uttered a religious war-cry; cf. Jos. 6"'-" where the same Heb.
word is used. — God smote]. Some supernatural help is in the mind
of the writer; c/. 14"' ('■). — 17. 500,000]. Cf.y.K — 18. They relied,
etc.]. Cf. 14'" (">. — 19. Bethel] mod. Beitin, about ten miles north
of Jerusalem; the seat of worship for one of the golden calves (i K.
12"). If this narrative were historical a mention or hint of this
capture and some fate of the golden calf would probably appear
elsewhere in OT. history and prophecy, but Bethel always seems to
have been a sanctuary of the N. kingdom, and to have retained the
calf (2 K. 10^9 Am. 7'^ Ho. 10= Beth-aven=Bethel). — Jeshana-f]
Cheyne also finds in i S. 7'^ where Heb. text has Shen (Grit. Bib.).
Josephus mentions a village of the same name in Samaria near the
border of Judah (Ant. xiv. 15, 12), probably the mod. 'Ain Sinja,
3J miles north of Bethel {SWP. II. pp. 291, 302). — 'Ephron-\'\
Qr. Ephrain, probably the same as Ephraim (Jn. 11") and
Ophrah (i S. 13'', Jos. 18") and Ephraim mentioned by Josephus
{BJ. IV. 9, 9) with Bethel, identified with mod. et-Taiyibeh, four
miles north-east of Bethel {DB. I. p. 728). — And Yahweh smote
him and he died]. The same language describes the fate of Nabal
(i S. 25'8) and implies some sudden and untimely end. This is
scarcely consistent, in view of the contrasted gathering of strength
of Abijah v. ", with the chronology of Kings, which makes Jero-
boam the survivor of Abijah at least a year. (Cf. 1 K. 1420 151 f • «).
Beyond the statement of the war between Abijah and Reho-
said three of the seven {Anl. iii. 8, 3). Cf. also c. Apion. (i. 22), where in a passage from
HecatEeus it is said that the Temple light is never extinguished either by day or by night.
The Mishna says that one of the seven burned by day (Tamid III. 9, VI. i). Philo, however,
speaks of their burning only at night and implies that they were extinguished by day {De Vir-
timis Of/erenlibiis, 7, init.). Cj. DD. l\. p. 664; Schurer, Gesch} II, p. 286 [HJP. II. i. p. 281].
378 2 CHRONICLES
boam (v. »''), and possibly the location of the battle (Bn.), there ap-
pears nothing historical in this narrative. The real result of the
war is difficult to determine. The unfavourable judgment of
Abijah in i K., and the hard pressure there recorded of Baasha
upon Asa, as though Asa had inherited an evil situation from his
father, certainly cast doubt upon any victory (cf. s. v. ^^), yet Graf
accepted a success of Abijah as historical {GB. p. 137), so likewise
Pa. {EHSP. pp. 194/.) and McC. {HPM. 1. p. 255).
21-23. Conclusion of Abijah's reign. — 21. This statement of
Abijah's might and the number of his wives and children is ac-
cepted as from an ancient tradition by Bn. and marked of historical
value by Ki. and thus quoted by Pa. {EHSP. p. 195). But this is
improbable. It is better to regard it as a fitting climax to his great
victory, penned by the Chronicler, Equally with Abijah's ap-
pearance as a preacher and the narrative of his success, it is at vari-
ance with the account in Kings where, after the short reign of three
years, having apparently no son, he is succeeded in all likelihood
by his brother, since the statement that Maacah was the mother of
both Abijah and Asa, and that the latter removed her from court
(i K. 15=- ">• '3), overrides the assertion that the successor of Abijah
was his son (i K. 15^) (We. Prol. p. 210). — 22. Commentary] lit.
Midrash, see Intro., p. 23. — The prophet Iddo]. Cf. I2'5. — 23
(XIV. 1). Taken in its first half from i K. 15*. — His brother should
probably (v. s.) be substituted for his son. — In his days the land had
rest ten years]. These words are by the Chronicler. This rest is
clearly considered the result of Asa's removal of the high places,
pillars, poles, and "sun-images" mentioned in 142- * ^'•^>. Asa's
piety required such a reward. The basis of the calculation of ten
years is not clear. Perhaps the period was reckoned in the
mind of the vnriter as beginning with the great victory of Abijah
over Jeroboam (Be., Ke., Zoe.). In reality the statement is con-
tradicted by the statement of i K. 15^- that there was war between
Asa and Baasha king of Israel all their days since Baasha began
to reign in the third year of Asa (i K. 1528- 33).
1. Dj?3n^] I K. 151 sq. oaj p. — n^DM] Dr. TH. § 127 ()3), Ges. § iiift,
I K. iSc. — ni2N] I K. D'3N, cf. i2"«. — 2. inio>D] elsewhere a man's
name, prob. text. err. i K. 15' noyn, also ii^" q. v., so here (&^. — •
XIII. 1-23.] REIGN OF ABIJAH 379
njjjj p SxniN na] i K. and (S'' diS-^ok na. — 3. noxii] cf. i K. 20'''. —
nnnSo nnj S^na] a case of apposition, Dr. TH.^ § 190. — 5. nyiS d^S]
Koe. iii. § 397d, on inf. Ges. § \\i\h and k. — nSn n^nj] a second ace.
after pj, so Koe. iii. § 3271, perh. better ace. of manner, Ges. § ii8w
and q; the phrase occurs elsewhere only in P, Nu. 18" {cf. also Lv.
2"). — 7. rSj)] instead of more usual rSx with yip, BDB. — SySa] cf.
Moore on Ju. 1922 for renderings in Vrss. and etymologies. The deriva-
tion from ^"ra and Sy, "without profit," BDB., he regards as dubious. Cf.
Smith on i S. i'« for references to later discussions. — 'Ui oyami] a cir-
cumstantial clause expressing time. — prnnn] also in v. « and v. 2', favour-
ite word of the Chronicler, cf. i' (1. 38). — 8 . oncN] with force of purpose,
followed by inf. a usage of the Chronicler. Cf. i Ch. 21" (1. 4) . — '^x\ dhni]
causal circumstantial clause since, etc. — pnn] with the meaning of crowd,
multitude 14'° 20^ '2 's m ^2', frequent in Ez. and Dn. (see BDB.),
only used exceptionally in early prose (1. 28). — 9. DiiSni]. Since in
w. =-'2 Abijah chides Jeroboam with having driven out the sons of
Aaron, the priests, and the Levites (v. S"), and with having appointed
priests from the people whoever were ready with offerings (v. ">)^ but no
mention is made of an appointment of persons to take the place of the
expelled Levites, and since the activities of the priests with Judah are
mentioned in detail (v. "), and since priests only are mentioned in con-
nection with the army and sounding the trumpets (vv. '2. u)^ it has been
held (by Buchler, ZAW. 1899, p. 99) that the Levites did not originally
stand in v. ^ and that the present i and 2 Ch. are a revision, in the interest
of the Levites, of an earlier form of the book. But there is really nothing
in this supposition. The Chronicler wrote sometimes influenced by the
phraseology of Dt. and sometimes by that of P. Precision in the use of
language was not one of his traits (v. Intro, p. 19). — mxnNn 'c>'3]
an expression of the Chronicler (1. 91); (g eK roO \aov t^s yrjs (and
wrongly) Trdcnjs. ^l follows ^ — n'' nSc*?]. The origin of this phrase,
equivalent to consecrate, is uncertain. Since it has a parallel in the
Assyrian umalli kdti " he filled the hand of one," i.e. " he gave, appointed,
enfeoffed, or presented" (Now. Arch. II. p. 121, after Halevy), it is
probably the adaptation to the induction into the priests' office of a
term used in general with such force. Thus Wellhausen's derivation,
then, is practically right when he derives it from the custom in early
times of filling the hand with money or the equivalent (Prol. p. 152).
DOlman (on Lv. 7") and Baudissin (DB. IV. p. 71) derive "consecra-
tion " from the notion of filling the priest's hand with his portion of the
sacrifice; and Selhn (Beitrdge, II. pp. 118/.) from the custom of filling
the hand of the priest with arrows, used in primitive times in giving
oracular responses; and von Hoonacker (Le Sacerdota Levitique, pp.
134/.) from filling the priest's hand with something to place upon the
altar. — n>ni . . . h2' hi\ an example of a subject separated from its
380 2 CHRONICLES
verb by 1, Koe. iii. § 41211, Dr. TH. § 123(a). — a^'n'^x nS*^] Koe. iii.
§ 38of, Ges. § 152a, foot-note. — 10. ijnjNi] Ges. § 143a, Koe. iii.
§ 34ig. — niH'*^] dat. after D\-T\B'a, r/. 22^ 238, Koe. iii. § 327c. — HDNSna]
(& suggestively iv toXs i(prjfj.eplaii avTwv, possibly read rnpVnc3. —
11. onopci] Hiph. of verb used in P over thirty times of burning (lit.
making smoke) the sacrifices on the altar. — aij73 . . . "ip3o] cf. for
these phrases Ex. 1621 30' Lv. 65 "=) i Ch. 92' 2330 Is. 28'9 50^ Ez. 4613 «■.
Only in this verse does the repetition of 213; occur. — naij'D] only of the
rows of the show-bread, and only here in construct before cnS, but before
i^Dii 2^, elsewhere with art. preceded by an'? i Ch. 9^2 2329 Ne. lo*", by
]nSs' 2 Ch. 2918, and nunS^' i Ch. 28'^ pi. abs. Lv. 24^ f . — ,inan ]n^z<n Sj?]-
This phrase also occurs in Lv. 24^. — mi:D] used only of the lamp-
stands of the tabernacle Ex. 252' et al. and of the Temple i K. 7" et al.
in I and 2 Ch. Je. 52'9, and of that of the vision of Zc. 4= " and of that
provided for Elisha by the Shunemite 2 K. 4'". — niece] used very fre-
quently in P and also Ch. of priestly and Levitical duties. — 12 . nnxxm]
cf. I Ch. 152^ (1. 44).
XIV-XVI. The reign of Asa (r. 9i7-876).~The Chronicler's
treatment of Asa is based upon the account given in i K. 15' 24.
There in vv. "-'^ Asa is commended for his piety. This is greatly
enlarged upon by the Chronicler, and Asa's prosperity is corre-
spondingly magnified (14'-' "•" 15 '-'0- A magnificent victory
over an invading force of Cushites not mentioned in Kings is also
recorded (i4«-'^ o-is)). The remainder of the account in i K.
(w. 16-22), apart from the summary of the reign, concerns the rela-
tions of Asa to the N. kingdom. This material is incorporated
by the Chronicler into his narrative with the addition of a prophetic
rebuke of Asa for his alliance with Syria (i6'->''). His last days,
also, are pictured in darker colours than in Kings, where a disease
in his feet is mentioned. This in Chronicles is made very great,
and the King is said also not to have sought Yahweh, but phy-
sicians (i6'2).
According to Ki. after Bn., c. 14 and i6'-" are from M, while 15'-'* is
from M2. This double origin is assigned from the double accounts of
reform, cf. 1425 with 15'. C. 15, however, is linked with c. 14 (cf. v. ",
where the sacrifices are from the spoil of victory). Historical incohe-
rence in reforms both before and after a victory would not trouble a
writer like the Chronicler, and thus prove compilation from two sources.
The tale of the victory, however, was not unlikely derived by the
Chronicler from his Midrashic source, and the grouping there of events
I
XIV. 1-7] ASA'S PIETY AND MIGHT 38 1
may have influenced him in his narrative, but the chapters throughout
bear marks of his pecuHar style and may well be regarded as his own
composition. The following are marks of the Chronicler's style: In
143 S 1DN with following inf. (1. 4); in 14' is'^mn'' pn b-^t (c/. i Ch. 1513213"
2 Ch. i5 i8') (1. 23); in 146 in>Sx>i (c/. 7" 1312 et al); in 141" 16'*
M-;z': ^•h•il {cf. 13I8); in 14"' isj? (1. 92); in 1412 n>nD onS ^nS (c/. i Ch.
22O; in 14" nra a late word 2513 28'« Ezr. 9'- i"- "s. is Ne. 3^6 Dn.
JJ24.33-J- (i_ loV, the similar phraseology in 152 end of verse and 12^''; jn
155 mx-iNH {cf. I Ch. 13") (1. 6); in is'^S withobj.; in i5'4 nnxxn (1. 44);
in i6'8 the repeated use of S; in i6'9 the relative sentence without TlI'n
subordinated to the preposition {cf. i Ch. i5''0(l- 120); in 16'^ nSynS nj;
(r/. I Ch. 14O (1. 127) (Graf, GB. p. 142).
XIV. 1-7 (2-8). Asa's piety and might. — This whole section
is an expansion or illustration of v. ' ^'\ which is from i K. 15". In
1 K. 15'Mt is recorded that Asa put away the sacred prostitutes
out of the land and removed all the idols which his fathers had
made. The Chronicler, however, entirely omits this statement so
utterly at variance with the piety and religious zeal already ascribed
to Rehoboam and Abijah; but he expands the reform of Asa into
one similar to those mentioned in Kings as WTOught by Hezekiah
and Josiah — i.e., the removal of the high places (2 K. 18^ • ^ 23*). —
2 (3.) Foreign altars] i.e., the altars of foreign gods, cf. Gn. 352-*
Jos. 242°- " Ju. lo's I S. 7^ Je. 5'9. — The high places]. In i K. 15'*
it is stated that Asa did not destroy the high places. — The pillars]
the massehoth, the sacred stones set up at a place of worship,
originally a primitive expression of the later altar, temple, or idol,
and naturally retained as the proper accessories of a sanctuary {cf.
Gn. 28'^"). The Deuteronomic law forbade their use (Dt. 16^)
and commanded their destruction (Dt. 7^ 123). — The asherim] fre-
quently mentioned with the foregoing and likewise forbidden (Dt.
162') andcommandedtobedestroyed(Dt. 7512'). They were wooden
poles set up like the stone pillars at sanctuaries. Their meaning is
obscure, scarcely a phallic emblem, possibly a substitute for a tree
as a residence of deity, or possibly originally boundary posts, re-
garded later as sacred. It has also been thought that there was a
Canaanite goddess Asherah, equivalent to the great Semitic god-
dess Astarte, whose symbol or idol was the Asherah post. {Cf.
I5'«.) But on this scholars are not agreed (Asherah, EBi. I. coll.
382
2 CHRONICLES
332/.; Dr. Dt. pp. 201/. ; Lagrange, Etudes sur les Religions Semi-
tiques, pp. i i()ff-, argues for goddess). Asheroth (pi. of Asherah) are
mentioned in 19= 33', elsewhere as here A shenm 17' 24" 31' ;^y^
343- *■ '. — 4. (5). Sun pillars] (only pi., 34^- ^ Lv. 26=° Is. 17^ 2j^-\)
probably a form of masseboth {cf. v. •^) (GFM. EBi. III. col. 2976),
regarded generally as pillars dedicated to the sun god (HDn) (Bn.).
— And the kingdom had rest under him (lit. before him)] re-
peated with emphasis in following verse, cf. i3"''(i4i). — 5 (6). This
story of the building of cities has probably some historical basis,
cf. I K. 15"; also Je. 41% where a pit built by Asa as a means of
defence is mentioned. — 7 (8). Shield and spear]. Cf. i Ch. 12" '■^*K
—Bucklers . . . and bows]. Cf 1 Ch. 8^". The shield (]:d) of
these bowmen was smaller than that of the spearmen. — The total
strength of Asa's army is 580,000, while Abijah, his father, led
forth an army of only 400,000 (13', cf. also 11' i7'0-
1. 1 3iBn] wanting in i K. 15" and so also vhSn. i K. adds vas ino.
—3. icnm] with the force of command (1. 4), or an example, in the fol-
lowing words, of the indirect discourse, cf. i Ch. 13'. — 6. }nsn imj?
irJoV] (&^ ivuiiriov TTjs 7^s KvpieOcroixev (S-^ ej w (^^ 4i> y Kvpteijcro/xev
T^s yyjs. — imy] sufBx masc. because it precedes. — iJUfl':'] at our dis-
posal, cf. Gn. 139 BDB. njo II. 4. a (/).- -Instead of Mu'-n-, ^^^^
read •iiK'"iT when we sought Yahweh our God lie sought us. (B^^ also
omit mn and read uS n'Ss-'i. Hence Winckler {Alt. Unter. p. 187)
proposes to read after Dt. 121" ij':' n^'SsM ij''J''ND 3^3Dn ^^h nri And he has
given us rest from our enemies round about and prospered us.
8-14 (9-15). Asa's victory over Zerah. — Not mentioned in
Kings, a good example of Midrash (see the numbers in v. ^ <-^)).
The story is either without historical foundation (so Kuenen, Einl.
pp. 139/.; St. Gesch. I. p. 355;We. Prol. pp. 257/.), orwith greater
probability has a historical basis in an Egyptian or Arabian inroad
(Graf, GB. p. 138; Erbt, Die Hebrder, p. 106; v. also i.).
— 8 (9). Zerah the Cnshite] (i) identified frequently with an
Egyptian king, either Osorkon. I or II., of the twenty-second (Bu-
basite) dynasty, and hence contemporary with Asa. In favour of
Osorkon II. is an alleged inscription which reads that all countries
of the upper and lower Retennu {i.e., Syria and Palestine) have been
thrown under his feet (Naville's Bubastis p. 5 1 ) . Ciishite or Ethiopian
XIV. 8-14.] ASA'S VICTORY OVER ZERAH 383
applied to Osorkon or Zerah must then have arisen from the
writer's confused knowledge of Egyptian affairs; he may have been
misled by 2 K 19' where Tirhakah is called King of Ethiopia
(Sayce, HCM. p. 363). The place of battle, Mareshah (v. i.),
favours an Eg}'ptian inroad. (2) Cushite may be connected with
the Cush of Arabia (i Ch. i'), and thus the inroad may have been
from Arabia (so Winckler, Alt. Untersuch. pp. 161-166, KAT.^ p.
144; Hommel, Ades 10th Cong. Interl. des Orientalisles, p. 112;
Paton, EHSP. pp. 196/.). Agreeable to this are the tents and the
spoil of sheep and camels mentioned in v. '^ <'5)_ Zerah may also rep-
resent the Sabean name Dhirrih, a title, meaning the magnificent,
of several of the oldest princes of Saba (Ba.) {v. s. Hommel). — A
thousand and three hundred chariots] a gross exaggeration from
every point of view. — Mareshah]. Cf.Ji^i Ch. 2^2 — 9 (10), In
the valley'] probably the valley at whose head stands Beit-Jibrin
(GAS. HGHL. pp. 230-233). — Zephathah "if], compared doubt-
fully by Robinson to Tell-es-Sdfiyeh {BR.^ II. p. 31). (g'^^
reads northward (Kara /3oppdv), and it is questionable whether
that was not the original reading, in the valley to the north of
Mareshah (n:S!if instead of nns:;) (Bn.).— 11 (12). Cf. 13'^- '^.
The non-reliance of Asa upon his large army (v. "s)) is noticeable.
The narrative is entirely artificial. — 12 (13). Gerar] south of
Gaza, usually identified with Umm Jerar (Baed.^ p. 121). — And so
many of the Ciishites fell that there was no recovery (Zoe., Oe., Ba.,
ARV.), or so that no life was left (Be., Ke., Kau., Ki., ARVm.).
The latter is better since the following clauses suggest annihilation.
— His host] i.e., heavenly beings (the older commentators); better,
from the statement of v.", Asa's army (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.). — 13
(14). And they smote all the cities in the neighbourhood of Gerar].
This implies that the inhabitants of this district had been abettors
of the Cushites. (Instead of D''"1"'J? cities, Bn. reads D''a"IJ? Ara-
bians.)— A terror from Yahweh ]. A panic seized the cities through
a supernatural terror caused by Yahweh (cf. lyi" 20"). — 14 (15),
Tents of cattle] a strange expression, possibly having arisen from
textual corruption. (^ has, in addition, a proper name represent-
ing some unknown tribe or place (toi)? 'A/Lta^oz/et?) (cf. 22'
text-note). The booty suggests an Arabian incursion.
384 2 CHRONICLES
10. n3 . • iDj; rn]. On force of aj? beside or like, cf. 20^ Ps. 7,^25
BDB. Dj? 3 d. On lo with S following c/. Gn. i^. (g reads oy/c
dSwarei irapa aol crw^eiv iv TroWots Kal iv 6\lyoii • following the text
of I S. i4« a-;c2 in 313 ynnS nixj,'D mniS ps. (gL adds here from ^
ots o{>K tffTiv tVxi^J. Iff >^o« est apud te ulla distantia utrum in paucis
auxilieris, an in plurihus. Kamp. preferred to read ixjjS instead of
itjjS, but that is not necessary.— pcnn] cf. 138. — -ix;"i] na is understood
(c/. I Ch. 29'S V. 1. 92).— 12. •nj'? nj'] <g has TeSwp, cf. i Ch. 439, "i>' used
with S, cf. Koe. iii. § 319c. — n^na DnS pxS] a clause denoting the com-
pleteness of the overthrow. In the earlier stage of the language S would
have been omitted with ps (Ew. § 315 c). This construction pN is pecu-
liar to the Chronicler, cf. 20-* 21" 36'^ i Ch. 22^ Ezr. 9" (1. 132).
XV. 1-19. The exhortation of Azariah, and Asa's religious
reforms.
1. Azariah the son of Oded'l not mentioned elsewhere. Cf.
V. ^ — The spirit of God'\ frequently mentioned as the cause
of prophetic action and speech {cf. i Ch. i2'8 2 Ch. 20'^ 242").
— 2. Yahweh was with you because you were with him]. The
prophet refers to the victory and makes it an occasion for advo-
cating the continuance of Asa's reforms (Ke.). Others render
Yahweh is with you if {when, while) you are with him (Zoe., Oe.,
Kau., Ki., ARV.). This rendering is not so good, ahhough a state-
ment of the general lesson to be drawn. — 3-6. Variously inter-
preted: a description of the N. kingdom (®); a prophecy of the
future {cf. Ho. y '■) ((S, U, as the tenses show, Zoe.); a description
of the nature of a general truth with reference either to the past or
future (Ke.); a reflection on the whole previous course of Israel's
history, parenthetical in Azariah's speech and from the Chronicler
(Ba.); a description with general reference (Bn.) yet strongly re-
minding one of the period of the judges (Be., Oe., Ki.). This last
view is as definite as any which can be given. V.' reflects the law-
less times of the judges; v." the repeated distress, and deliverance
on calling on Yahweh; v. = the violence and oppression so often de-
scribed {cf. Ju. 5« 62-«); V. ^ the intertribal and interurban conten-
tions (Ju. 8^-9 '*■" 9'-" i2'-«). This whole speech of Azariah fits
in badly with the occasion of the victory and is an unskilful intro-
duction to the reform of Asa, an ecclesiastical renovation so dear to
the heart of the Chronicler. — 3. Without a teaching priest and
XV. 1-19.] REFORMS OF ASA 385
without la'w\ The two expressions are synonymous. The giving
of legal instruction was a function of the priest (Dt. 2,2,^° Je. iS's Ho.
46 f.) — 5. Lands] i.e., districts of the territory of Israel (c/. 11"
I Ch. 132). — 6. Nation against nation] i.e., one part or tribe of
Israel against another.
8. 'Oded the prophet] either a gloss (Be., Ki.), or representing a
lacuna which should be supplied after ^, B, with the reading even
the prophecy which Azariahthe son of' Oded had spoken. — Detestable
things] objects connected with idolatry {cf. i K. ii^ 2 K. 232^). —
Cities, etc.]. Since no mention is made of cities taken by Asa, the
reference is generally supposed to be to those taken by his father
Abijah (13"). — And he renewed the altar]. This statement im-
plies some unrecorded desecration of the altar, or it may embody
simply the historical fact of the renewal of the ancient Mosaic and
purer imageless worship of Yahweh (cf. Erbt, Die Hebrder, p. 105).
— 9. Within the territory of the S. kingdom are represented to have
been members of the adjoining tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh, and
Simeon, who were either permanent residents from the first (cf
ID' 7), or drawn thither by the feeling that through the piety of Asa
Yahweh was with the S. kingdom ((/. iV"- 3o")- This prob-
ably reflects the condition at the time of the Chronicler, when
doubtless many Jews traced their descent from families of the ten
tribes (cf. Lk. i^*), and the devout sought residence in the land of
Palestine. — Simeon]. While historically the tribe was probably
absorbed either by the desert tribes south of Judah or into Judah
(cf. I Ch. 424 ff), it was reckoned as one of the ten tribes constitut-
ing the N. kingdom (i K. ii^')- — 10- The third month]. In this
was the Feast of Weeks, Pentecost, which according to the later
Jewish tradition commemorated the giving of the law, and
hence the entrance of Israel into a covenant relation with Yahweh;
and thus, if this tradition was as early as the Chronicler or his
source, this would explain the month as appropriate for the cove-
nant of V. '^ The reason for the date in the fifteenth year of the
reign of Asa is entirely obscure, and especially so in view of the fol-
lowing verse, where mention is made of the offering of spoil, presu-
mably of the contest with Zerah, but since according to 13" (14')
" the land was quiet ten years" the contest with Zerah took place
25
386 2 CHRONICLES
in the eleventh year of Asa; the war, then, is held to have lasted
some four years (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). But possibly the discrepancy
arises because the Chronicler here is following a source dif-
ferent from that of the previous chapter {v. s.). — 12. They
entered into a covenant]. On form of expression cf. Je. 34'°. It
means that they bound themselves by a solemn obligation or oath
(cf. V. '") to seek Yahweh . . . with all their heart and all their
soul {cf. Dt. 4"). For the manner of taking such an obligation
cf. 34" Je. 34'^ f-. — 13. This resolution was according to the law
(Dt. i3«-'<i 172-7). — Whether small or great] i.e., whether young or
old. — 14. Shout of jo y\ Cf. i Ch. 1528. — On the musical instru-
ments, trumpets and cornets (nTlSty, TiTl^^n), cf. i Ch. 152^
16-19, from i K. 1513-15. — 16. Ma'acah]. Cf 13=. — Asherah].
Whether there was ever a Canaanitish goddess Asherah (BDB.)
is a disputed question (DB., EBi.) (cf. 14^), but the name
seems to have been so used or understood here. — An horrible
thing] I K. I5''t, some kind of idol or idolatrous symbol;
H simulacrum Priapi with reference to the phallus cult. This
interpretation, as good as any, is usually accepted. — And he
crushed] wanting in i K. 15", added by the Chronicler, bringing
the destruction of the horrible thing (miphlezeth) in accord with that
of the golden calf (Ex. 32") and the asherah (2 K. 23^ 2 Ch. 34^- ').
— Valley of Kidr on] on the east of Jerusalem, where objects used
in heathen worship were regularly destroyed (cf. 29'6 30" i K. 15"
2 K. 23*- «•'=), probably because the place as a burying-ground was
considered unclean (Kidron, DB.). — 17. From Israel] i.e., Israel
in the sense of Judah (cf. 11') (Be., Zoe., Oe., Ba.), but this in-
terpretation is doubtful. Since in 14^ '^' Asa is said to have re-
moved the high places, the Chronicler probably added here from
Israel in the meaning of the N. kingdom (over which Asa had
historically no control) and thus harmonised this verse with 14^ <*'
(Ki., Bn.). — 18. These dedicated things were possibly spoils of war
(cf. I Ch. 18"), and since mentioned in i K. 1515 have been re-
garded as aconfirmationfrom that source of the victories of Abijah
and Asa narrated in 131s «■ 1495 (Be., Oe., Ba.); another explana-
tion is that they were removed, through fear of Baasha (i K. 15"),
from some sanctuary and brought to Jerusalem for safe-keeping
XVI. 1-6.] WAR WITH BAASHA 387
(Bn.). — 19. And there was not war, etc.]. According to i K. i5'«- ^^
war was between Asa and Baasha all their days. This discrep-
ancy has been explained by regarding the Chronicler's statement
as referring to the absence of any serious occurrence or an open
declaration of war in spite of continued hostility (Ke., Zoe., Oe.,
Ba.). In reality the Chronicler, however, probably regarded this
continued warfare as inconsistent with Asa's piety, and hence
wrote the history accordingly. — The thirty-fifth year] v. i.
1, iniiTi-i] Ges. § 143&. — 3. D'-ai D"'!:''i] ace. of duration Ges. § 118^.
— The usage of S with nS (three times) is peculiar and not found else-
where (1. 133, Koe. iii. § 402 /3); called an example of ^ with subject (Bn.).
—5. nisixn] districts of Israel's territory, cf. ii^^ i Ch. 132 Gn. 263''. —
6. inn^i] in eight MSS. and (&, H, Pi. — 7. idi^] Ges. § 145/). — 8, NOjn -\•^•;'\
an insertion, as the abs. nxnjn shows (Ges. § 127/). (&^ Azariah the
prophet, U Azariah the son of 'Oded the prophet. Perhaps we should
read }3 in^-i?>- n3T iti-x (Ki. BH.). — pinnn] cf. for construction 12%
for use I Ch. ii'".— 9. ai'^] cf. i Ch. 433.— 11. ixo.i] rel. om., cf. i Ch.
9"fc> (1. 120). — 16. m^Dn . . . cn] i K. i5>3 moM icn. — pnM] wanting in
I K., V. s. — 17. SNTi>^c] wanting in i K., v. s. — After uh<y i K. 15'^ has
mr\> D-;. — 18. D'nSxn] i K. 1515 mn\ — 19. npin nS nnnSci] i K. i5'6
om. n"?.
XVI. 1-6. The war with Baasha.— Derived from i K. 151'-"
— 1. In the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Asa] wanting in 2 K.,
and with the thirty-fifth year mentioned in 15" historically an im-
possible date, since according to i K. i68- '» Baasha died in the
twenty-sixth year of Asa. Hence thirty-fifth (15'') and thirty-sixth
are due either to copyists' errors, or to an improper reckoning by
the Chronicler. Under the former supposition the original has been
held to have been the fifteenth and sixteenth (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.),
a view which has been felt to harmonise with the previous state-
ments that during the first ten years of Asa's reign there was peace
(13" (14')), and hence (it may be assumed) that in the eleventh
year the inroad of the Cushites took place (14'^), followed by the
cultus reform culminating in the celebration and the covenant in
the fifteenth year (15*-'^), and that then came the war with Baasha
in the following year. But such a speedy war with Baasha is un-
thinkable from the Chronicler's point of view. The covenant and
the loyalty could only have been followed by an era of peace, and
388 2 CHRONICLES
this is expressly stated in 15'^ where it says, " Yahweh gave them
rest round about." The Chronicler delayed then the war with
Baasha until the close of Asa's reign in order to place in this con-
nection his sin {cj. vv. '«•), late in his life and near its punish-
ment through the disease in his feet three years later (v. ^^)., for the
Chronicler undoubtedly thus regarded the disease, and, therefore,
lie placed the war with Baasha in the thirty-sixth year of Asa's
reign. Other explanations of the thirty-fifth and thirty-sixth years
are a reckoning based on the separation of the N. and S. kingdoms,
since the thirty-fifth year of the disruption corresponds to the fif-
teenth of Asa (Mov., Ba.); or a derivation from the Midrash source
of the Clironicler, which had a chronology or scheme of synchro-
nism with the N. kingdom quite different from that of i and 2 K.
(Bn., Ki.). — Baasha king of Israel]. According to i K. 15'*
Baasha came to the throne of Israel in the third year of Asa, and
the war between the two kingdoms was continuous (i K. i5'«- 5^). —
And he built] i.e., as the connection shows, fortified, since Ramah,
mod. er-Ram five miles north of Jerusalem, is mentioned in the
earUer history {cf. Ju. 4* 19"). The town clearly commanded the
highway leading to Jerusalem. How far the Chronicler is from
being a historian is seen in the fact that no mention is made of the
implied loss of the cities mentioned in 15*. — 2, Silver and gold].
I K. 15" has " all the silver and gold that were left" with reference
to the loss through the invasion of Shishak (12' i K. 14"). This
statement is omitted, doubtless, because such a reference to de-
pleted treasuries would have been quite inappropriate after the
prosperity of Asa mentioned above. — The line of descent of Ben-
hadad King of Damascus (c. 885-844 B.C.) (KAT.^ p. 134) is also
omitted. — 3. A league is between me and thee as was between my
father and thy father]. Whether this statement is merely rhetorical
or refers to an actual alliance it is impossible to determine. This
successful invocation of Benhadad was later paralleled in the
appeal of Ahaz to Tiglath-pileser, King of Assyria, for assistance
against Damascus and N. Israel (2 K. 16"'). — 4. The places smit-
ten are, naturally, on the northern frontier of Israel. — 'Ijon] (i K.
1520 2 K. 15'' t) survives in the name Merj 'Ayun, a rich oval plain
at the foot of the mountains of Naphtali, near the bend of the river
XVI. 7-14.] ASA'S REBUKE AND DEATH 389
Litanv, and is identified with Tell Dibhin near the northern end of
this plain(£5i. II. col. 2160; Rob. BR^ III.p.375).— y46e/ Maww]
I K. 152° Abel Beth Ma'acah and also 2 K. 15==' 2 S. 20'^ (fue reading)
MAbei^ mod. Abil el Kajuh, a small village on a hill 1,074
feet above the sea, almost directly opposite Banias, and on the
main road thence to Sidon and the coast (GAS. in EBi). Mayim
is probably r'ue to textual corruption. — All the store-cities] 1 K.
15=" " all the Chinneroth," i.e., the fertile district of Gennesaret west
of the sea of Galilee, " along with all the land." The rendering of
the Chronicler seems suggested by this text (v. i.). — 5. And he
caused the work to cease\ This statement also is derived, ap-
parently, from a corruption or misunderstanding of the text {v. i.).
I K. 15-' has "and he dwelt in" (or after (S "returned to")
"Tirzah." — 6. And he built] i.e., fortified. — Gebd] mod. Jeba,
seven miles north of Jerusalem, the scene of Jonathan's exploit (i
S. 14 ' « ), and from the time of Asa apparently the northern limit
of the S. kingdom (2 K. 23 ', cf. Zc. m'"). — Mizpah] probably
mod. Nabi Samwil, five miles north-west of Jerusalem. The place
is frequently mentioned (Ju. 20'' 21'^- » i S. ']'' et al.). The forti-
fication of these places would protect the S. kingdom from en-
croachm.ents on the north.
7-10. The rebuke of Hanani. — Asa is severely condemned for
his invocation of the aid of Syria, especially after his great victory
over the Cushites. 7, Hanani] mentioned in 19^ 20'^ i K. 16''
as the father of the prophet Jehu. The seer] (nS"in) also v.'",
used elsewhere by the Chronicler only of Samuel (i Ch. 9^2 26^8
29"); clearly an archaism; yet regarded as an evidence of an an-
cient tradition (v. i.). — Therefore is the host of the king of Aram
escaped out of thy hand]. The prophet seems to imply that if Asa
had relied upon Yahweh he would not only have conquered
Baasha, but also the Syrians who were in league with him (v. 3). —
8. C/. 14'-'^ — Lubim]. Cf. 12K The Chronicler plainly regarded
the Cushites of Zerah as an Egyptian host. — 9. For the eyes of
Yahweh, etc.] an expression of divine omniscience and provi-
dential care (cj. Zc. 4'" Pr. 15^). — For from henceforth thou shall
have wars]. No additional wars are recorded during the reign of
Asa, but the policy of foreign alliances naturally provoked them.
390
2 CHRONICLES
C/. the similar situation in the case of Ahaz (Is. 7 2 K. 16). — 10.
For similar treatment of prophets cf. that of Micaiah, 18"; of
Jeremiah, Je. 20=; and, even worse, that of Zechariah, 24", and
of Uriah, Je. 26-"".
11-14. The conclusion of Asa's reign. — An expansion of i K.
15"'. — 11. First and last]. Cf. i Ch. 292". — In the book of the
kings of Judah and Israel] {v. Intro, p. 22) i K. 15" "in the
book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah." — 12. In the thirty-
ninth year] i K. 15-' " in the time of his old age." — His disease,
etc., to the end of verse] wanting in Kings. — And also in his
disease, etc.]. Even as in the war with Israel he sought human aid
through Syria, so here in his last sickness he seeks it through his
physicians. The reference to physicians is unique in the OT.,
although they are elsewhere mentioned (cf Gn. 50^ in connection
with embalming, Jb. 13^ Je. 8-). The art of healing seems to
have been practised by the prophets. Cf. the application to Elisha
2 K. 4''''-, and the healing work of Isaiah 2 K. 20' Is. 38^. Pos-
sibly this passage reflects the activity of physicians in the Chron-
icler's own time. Cf. their praise in BS. 38' -'\ — 13. And died,
etc.] wanting in i K. — 14. i K. 15=* "and was buried with his
fathers in the city of David his father." The burial of Asa is de-
scribed as though of exceeding magnificence or care. The laying
of him ow a resting-place filed with spices and various perfumes
prepared after the perfumers^ art was after the custom of preparing
the body thus for the burial {cf. Jn. 19^" Mt. 27" Mk. 15" Lk. 23").
The burning {cf. 21" Je. 34^) was not of the body, since cre-
mation was contrary to the customs of the Hebrews, but probably
of spices, possibly originally a form of sacrifice for the dead (Now.
Arch. I. p. 197; EBi. II. col. 1337).
1. (SEA 38th year, (gL 30th.— N31 nsv] cf. Jos. 6=.— 2. nxm] i K.
i5>8 npM. — '0 2r\■{^ pp^] i K. '2 onnijn 3nimr]D3n Sjhn {v. s.). After hSd
I K. has v^2y ^^3 a:n''V — n':'!;"'!] 1 K. ndn ^SDn urh^^x — ptt-D-n] i K.
pZ"D-\. — 3. (gACL 5ti,eov Siae-qK-qv followed by ARVm. Let there he. — After
n*? I K. is'^has inty. — 4. iom] <&, i K. 15=" T'l. — -hiMii . . . Sjn pni] i K.
1520 iSpdj \-\h ^-2 Sj; nnjo So nsi njyn no Sns pni. The text of the Chron-
icler is based either on a corruption, illegibiHty, or from a ready sugges-
tion of the letters, or possibly it is another name of the district given
owing to its fertility (Ba.), but (S-^bl have irepix'^povs suggesting nn''JD.
J
XVn.-XX.] REIGN OF JEHOSHAPHAT 391
— 5. ipdnSd PS nas-M] a corruption or substitulion for nsnpa a'^'M (i K.
152')- — 6. npS] I K. i^-ipcii'n. — After min^ K. has "p: VH and after ja'i
the king Asa, and after >'3J /;; Benjamin.— 7 and 10. nNin]. This title is
bestowed elsewhere only on Samuel, i S. g^- "• '^ '■ 1 Ch. 9" 2628 2929.
Since therefore an ancient title, Jastrow finds in the use of the term here
an evidence at Icaf-t that the story of Hanani is ancient if not authentic
(JBL. XXVIII. 1900, p. 49). But the application of this term to Hanani
is made with no reference to the ancient meaning assigned to nsi by Jas-
trow (v. I Ch. 2929), and the Chronicler may have been led to use the
archaic term here under the influence of i S. 9'. — 12. x^n^i] v. 1. 40. —
fl-';nS -ly] cf. I Ch. 142 (1. 87). — '•• t:n-i] v. 1. 23. — D''N312]. Jastrow would
read either D'n^J U7tto the seers or D^'Nonj un/o the dead {op. cit. p. 49
f. n. 23).
XVII-XX. The reign of Jehoshaphat {c. 876-851 b.c.).— The
Chronicler has made use of all of the narrative given in i K. con-
cerning Jehoshaphat (i K. 1524b 22'-«'> ^i-so). A slight portion of
this he has rewritten {cf. 18' -^ 20=5-"), and the whole he has supple-
mented with a large amount of new material (lyit-'s 1 91-20^°) in
which the reign of Jehoshaphat appears one of unusual religious
activity and external splendour. The King busies himself with the
instruction of his people in the law of Yahweh (ly'-^ and in the
establishment of a system of courts (19^-"). His rule is also one of
military success. He buiJt castles and store-cities and had a
greet army (lyi^-'^). He received large tribute from the Philis-
tines and Arabians (ly'" «•), and won a most signal victory over the
Moabites and Ammonites through the direct intervention of Yah-
weh in response to prayer and praise (20'-"). The King's only
shortcomings seem to have been his alliances, recorded in i K.,
with the N. kingdom (192 20"), which resulted in his exposure to
peril at Ramoth-gilead (c. 18) and the loss of his ships (20").
While this new material is all of the spirit and style of the Chronicler,
Bn. and Ki. find here several sources. Ki. after Bn. analyses as follows:
17"' from I K. 1524b; vv.ib-o from M^; vv. '-^ from an old historical
source; vv. '"-'s from M2; 18' -3» from the Chronicler; vv. ^t-si from
I K. 22; 1 91 -3 from the Chronicler; w. ^-n from the Chronicler's fore-
runner; 2oi-i8fromM; v. '^ from the Chronicler; vv. ^i -33a from i K.;
vv. 33b-37 from the Chronicler. But all the e.xtra canonical material is of
the spirit and style of the Chronicler, v. i. and cf. in 17' pinnn (1. 38);
in 174 2o3 ^7 c'-M (1. 23); in 17' 192 2q'o S with ace. (1. 128); in i;'"
392 2 CHRONICLES
20"" D'hSn, nini -ino {cf. 14") (1. 96); in i;'" pixinh no'?cr! {cf. i Ch.
29'", 1. 6); in ly'^ 20" nSycS •\y (1. 87); in 192 vjb Sn nxm {cf. 152); in
193 aS and tt'Ti after Hiph. of jo (c/. i2'< 30'' Ezr. yi" t); in 19^ 'i:* ■'CPM
(1. 89), and n'j?i i^j: (1. 124); in 2o« ij\-iaN ti'^'N nin'- very often in
Ch., and 3S^nnS ^Dp fNi {cf. 14'"); in 20=- '= 3T |icn (1. 28); in 20-0
n''Sxm (c/. 1312); in 20^' om^'D (only in writings of Chronicler, 1. iii);
in 20=5 PnS {cf. I4'2, 1. 132); 2o3° also should be compared with 14^-*
i5'5; c/. in 20" -\sy {cf. 14'° I Ch. 29", 1. 92) (Graf, GB. p. 145).
XVII. 1-6. The piety and prosperity of Jehoshaphat. — 1.
And Jehoshaphat reigned in his stead] i.e., in the place of Asa, a
transcription of i K. 15"''. — 2. Fortified cities have an important
place in the narrative of the Chronicler. Rehoboam built them
(ii''-'2); Abijah took cities (13"); Asa built them (i4«-^) and like-
wise Jehoshaphat {cf. w. '=• '^ 213). — Which Asa his father had
taken]. Cf. 158. — 3. The first ways of David his father] i.e., the
earlier years of David before he fell into the sins of adultery (2 S.
II ff.) and numbering the people (2 S. 24 i Ch. 21) (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe.). But David is wanting in (^-"^^ ((^^ has it), hence
in all probability is a gloss (Ba.). The reference then is to Asa,
the father of Jehoshaphat, whose first ways, according to the
Chronicler, were good (cc. 14, 15) and his latter evil (c. 16). —
The Baalim] i.e., a false god or gods in contrast with Yahweh
(cf. Ju. 2"). Baal means primarily a "proprietor" or "pos-
sessor," hence "master," "lord," and was a common desig-
nation of deity like our word "Lord." In early times it was used
of Yahweh, as clearly appears from its appearance in proper
names (cf. 1 Ch. 8'* 14') and the prohibition of its use by Hosea
(2 18 (16)) J but later, since the gods of the Canaanites were generally
thus designated, it canie to signify a false god. — 4. Of his father]
another reference to Asa (cf. v.^ (^ v. s.). — The doings of Israel].
Cf. iVK — 5. Tribute] i.e., free gifts, perhaps, at the King's ac-
cession, rather than royal exactions (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.).
— 6. And his heartwas lifted up]. Only here is this expression used
in a good sense, elsewhere it has a bad meaning (cf. 26'^ 32^5 Ez.
2^1. i.u Ps. 1311 Pr. i8'2, BDB.). — And furthermore he took away,
etc.]. This statement is not in harmony with that of i K. 22",
quoted by the Chronicler in 20=3, where it is said "the high places
were not taken away" but they were frequented by the people.
XVII. 1-19.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S PROSPERITY 393
Such discrepancies did not trouble the Hebrew historian. — The
high places and the asheriin]. Cf. 14^ '".
7-9. The commission for teaching the law. — This narrative is
a duplicate of the account of the establishment of the judiciary given
in i9^-'> (Bn., Ki.). No record of such events is found in Kings,
and it is not impossible that Jehoshaphat, perhaps through the in-
fluence of his alliance with the N. kingdom {v. i.), introduced some
new organisation for the administration of justice or law (Winckler,
KAT.^ p. 252; Erbt, Die Hebrder, p. 109), yet v. i. 19^". The ap-
pointment of laity in connection with Levites and priests has been
regarded as a mark of an ancient and reliable tradition (Bn., Ki.).
Otherwise, however, this section bears every evidence of being late
and written by the Chronicler. The book of the law of Yahweh is
a reflection of Deuteronomy, and the names of the commissioners
as a whole belong to a period later than the ninth century (Gray,
HPN. p. 231). Already, also at the time of the Chronicler, must
have begun the study, exposition, and teaching of the law by
members of the laity who were later reckoned among the Scribes. —
7. In the third year]. This date is given to show that Jehoshaphat
at the very outset of his reign concerned himself with the instruc-
tion of his people in the law. — Ben-hail f] signifies "son (man) of
might," cf. Abi-hail ii'^; yet possibly it does not belong as a proper
name in the text, but as in (^, 21, is descriptive of the princes, eveji
sons of valour {v. i.). — 8. And with them the Levites]. The tend-
ency of the Chronicler is to dignify the Levites, and thus he assigns
to them the priestly duty of teaching (cf. v. ' 35' Ne. 8'-" DB. IV.
p. 93). — 9. And they taught in Jtidah]. The priests were the
guardians of the law (Ho. 4« '■ Je. iS'^, cf. Dt. 17* ff- i9'5«- ZZ^'')^ ^.nd
hence its teachers, and under Jehoshaphat an impulse may have
been given for instruction in the law through the priests and others,
although such a general measure as is here mentioned is probably
not historical. — The book of the law of Yahweh] v. s.
7. SinpS] (g, 31, S'inijj'? sons {men) of strength qualifying mtt', cf.
I Ch. 5'8 2 Ch. 286 Ju. 21"' I S. 14" 18" 2 S. 2' 1710 2 K. 2^*. — 8. ait:
n^jnN f ] looks like a dittography arising from the two previous names.
10-19. The greatness of Jehoshaphat and his army. — The
summary of Jehoshaphat's reign given in i K. 22" -s" shows that it
394 2 CHRONICLES
was one of prosperity and peace with the N. kingdom. His might
is there mentioned, and since he was a good king who "walked in
all the ways of Asa his father," and "turned not aside from doing
that which was right in the eyes of Yahweh," i K. 22", the Chron-
icler naturally ascribes unto him much greatness, with possibly
some real historical reminiscence (z'. i.). — 10. Then a terror from
Yahweh, etc.]. The Chronicler represents a supernatural dread
of Judah, caused by Yahweh, coming upon the neighbouring
peoples, presumably as a reward for Jehoshaphat's zeal for the law
(r/. i4>3 (n) 2o29 Gn. 355). — 11. The Arabians]. The term ^rai
primarily means "people of the desert," and came into use among
the Hebrews as indicating a particular people, i.e. the inhabitants
of northern Arabia, relatively late (first used in this strictly eth-
nographical sense in Ne. 2^^ 6'); and Arabians in the writings of the
Chronicler probably reflects the powerful kingdom of the Naba-
teans already established in his day, south and south-east of Judah,
and he mentions them here and elsewhere (cf. 22' 26') to present in-
telligibly to his readers an event (whether real or assumed) like
that of Jehoshaphat's glory. Tlie Philistines would be under-
stood by his readers from their knowledge of the canonical books,
the Arabians from present conditions (Noeldeke, EBi. I. col. 274).
It is yet possible, however, that some tribute from the Philistines and
desert tribes was historical, a real result of Asa's victory over
Zerah (i4«-'^ 0-15)) (so at least as far as the Arabians are con-
cerned, Winckler, KA T.^ p. 252). For a similar tribute oi flocks or
their product cf. 2 K. 3'. — 12. Castles and cities of store]. Cf. v. ^.
— 13. And he had great property]. (BDB.) The context shows
that by this property the writer meant military supplies (so Ke.).
The rendering "work for equipping and provisioning the fort-
resses" (Be.) is certainly not so good. — 14. The soldiers were en-
rolled according to their families. — Adnah] is also the name of a
Manassite, i Ch. i22» "o)_ — XQ. Who willingly offered himself unto
Yahweh]. Cf. Ju. 5^ It is unfortunate that the Chronicler has
not explained why this phrase of honour was applied to Amasiah.
— 17. Equipped with bow and shield] i.e., light-armed troops, for
which Benjamin was famous. Cf. i Ch. 12^ and (on shield) cf. 1 Ch.
1225 (24) 2 Ch. 14' <8>.— 18. The total number of these warriors is,
XVin. 1-34.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S ALLIANCE WITH AHAB 395
of Judah 780,000, of Benjamin 380,000, making a grand total of
1,160,000. Tiiis is the largest force assigned anywhere to the S.
kingdom. On the gross exaggeration of such numbers cf. ly,
and for other lists ii". From Jehoshaphat's connection with the
N. kingdom and his assistance rendered in war {cf. c. 18) it is
probable that he maintained something of an army, and so far
some historical truth underlies this section.
10. niH"' ins] a terror from Yahweh. Subjective genitive, Ges. § 128^.
— ns-iNH] a late usage, cf. i Ch. 132 2 Ch. ii=3. — 11. dvid'^d jm]
partitive use of is, cf. i Ch. 4^2 930. 32 2 Ch. 32=1 (BDB. p 3. b (a)).— hddi
net] and silver for tribute ARV., Kau., after H et vectigal argenti, but
better silver a burden, i.e., a great quantity (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki.).
(g Kal 86fj.aTa (vSTOi). — 3''X''3"i>'n] a late form, elsewhere either D''2i>'n
(21I6 22') or D''''3"("n (26'). — "11N3 . . . □'•k;'\-ii] wanting in 05^, ffi. — 12.
^S^] with co-ordinate adj. denotes continuance, cf. Ex. 19'' i S. 2'^^
2 S. 3' et al., V. Ges. § 113W. — n^;aS i>']c/. i Ch. 14=. — nrj-1^3] fortresses,
pi.' of n'jio, a late word {cf. mo i Ch. 291), also pi. 27^ t- — -"30n >■>';]
store cities, cf. 2 Ch. 8". — 14. nSs] looking forward has the force of a
neut. sing., cf. 3^. And this was their enrolment according to the houses of
their fathers of Judah captains of thousands : Adnah the captain, etc. —
Dn>ni3!< n''2'^] pi. Ges. § i2^r. — 16. S^n inj] to be taken either collec-
tively referring to the 200,000 of 'Amasiah, or must be read nuj.— 17.
PZ'p ip-i'j] cf I Ch. 122.
XVIII. 1-34. Jehoshaphat in alliance with Ahab. — Taken
from I K. 22' -351 almost verbatim except in the case of i K. 22'-',
which is rewritten or replaced in 18' -2. The narrative in i K. be-
longs to the prophetic stories forming a part of the history of
Ahab, and is the only instance of an extensive excerpt from the
history of N. Israel in Chronicles. It was apparently introduced
for the honourable part which Jehoshaphat performed in seeking
the word of Yahweh through Micaiah, and especially as a back-
ground of the reproof given for the alliance with Ahab in the
following chapter.
1-3. Jehoshaphat allies himself with Ahab. — Vv. ' f are from
the pen of the Chronicler. — 1. And had wealth and honour in ahun-
dance] a duplicate of 17^''. — And he formed a marriage alliance
with Ahab] through the marriage of Jehoram the son of Je-
hoshaphat with Athaliah the daughter of Ahab (2 K. 8"). From
the disruption at the death of Solomon until the reign of Je-
396 2 CHRONICLES
hoshaphat, the N. and S. kingdoms seem to have been openly hos-
tile to each other. How a reconciliation was effected between the
two, whether by war or negotiation, is unknown, but, in view of the
military service rendered to Israel in the Syrian wars (i K. 22 2 K.
8-' f) and against Moab (2 K. y «•), Judah appears to have been
a dependency of Israel. Yet, notwithstanding the denunciation
given in 19^, this alliance must have contributed much to the wel-
fare of the S. kingdom, and probably laid the foundation for its
prosperity under Jehoshaphat. Possible influences of the alliance
have already been noticed (v. s.). — 2. At the end of years'\ an in-
definite expression of time substituted by the Chronicler for "and
it came to pass in the third year" (i K. 22^), where the reference is
to the period of peace between Syria and Israel (i K. 22'). The
Chronicler probably referred to the marriage affinity, and means
that some time after this Jehoshaphat visited Samaria. — And
Ahab killed, etc.]. Ahab is represented as receiving Jehosha-
phat on a friendly visit with great honour, and inducing him to
join in the expedition against Ramoth-gilead, but the probability
is that Ahab first decided on the expedition and then called upon
Jehoshaphat to join him, whereupon the latter comes to Samaria
(Klo., Bn. on i K. 22^). — Ramoth-gilead]. Cf. for location i Ch.
665 (80 )_ This frontier town was taken from Israel by the Syrians
during either the reign of Baasha (i K. 15") or more probably in
the reign of Omri (i K. 2o3''), and not restored according to the
treaty made after the battle of Aphek (i K. 2o3''), hence the expedi-
tion of Ahab. — 3. From here through the chapter the narrative of
I K. 22^-" is followed almost verbatim. While Jehoshaphat in the
language of diplomacy in this verse expresses unanimity and full
co-operation with Ahab, the subsequent narrative seems to reveal
an underlying reluctance on the part of Jehoshaphat to enter
upon the undertaking from doubt in regard to its successful issue.
For changes in the verse compared with i K. 22" v. i.
2. D'jtf yph] a substitute for niciSs'n nr^o •'hm in i K. 22^ (v. s.). —
ni'Sj . . . ^\2V^] wanting in i K. — 3. Ch. omits i K. 22^. Snii:'^ i^^v aNns
and nTin> ^'?c are wanting in i K. 22''. — ^nj.'] i K. tin + nDnScS. —
lS 1DN>1] I K. SnIB'i -i':'D Sn tODU'lH'" -lDNi\ — "'DJ? lD}.'3l] I K. "l^iVD "'Oi'3. —
HDnSna ^]^sy^] wanting in i K., which has instead T'Dids ididd.
I
XVm. 1-34.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S ALLIANCE WITH AHAB 397
4-27. The prophecy of Micaiah. — This is one of the most
illuminating narratives in the OT. respecting the prophets of Yah-
weh. Micaiah vs. the four hundred shows that as sharp a line of
cleavage ran between prophets of Yahweh in the days of Elijah and
Elisha as in the days of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, when these latter de-
nounced false prophets who clearly spoke in the name of Yahweh
(Je. 23'ff- 28' «• Ez. 122' ff. 1^1 fi.), The appearance of four hundred
prophets of Yahweh at the court of Ahab reveals that this story
was written from a different point of view from i K. 17-19, where,
under Ahab and Jezebel, the prophets of Yahweh are banished and
slain and only Elijah appears left. Some prophets of Yahweh,
then, were time-servers, ready to compromise with the worship
of Baal and to prophesy according to royal pleasure, while others
stood, like Elijah, for the worship of the righteous Yahweh alone.
With these latter, Micaiah must be classed. These prophets were
the forerunners of Amos, Hosea, and the other authors of OT.
written prophecy. Some OT. writers only recognised this second
class, while others took a broader view and enable us to trace more
accurately the actual events of history. — 5. The prophets]. These
were prophets of Yahweh, since the King was inquiring after the
word of Yahweh (v. ^). — 6. Is there no prophet of Yahweh here
besides] i.e., in addition to the four hundred who had spoken with
such unanimity. Jehoshaphat evidently felt that Ahab had only
called the prophets who were subservient to his desire and re-
sponded accordingly. — 9. Clothed in garments] i.e., in royal attire.
— In a threshing-floor]. A tlireshing-floor would be a large, flat,
open, and elevated place, and hence convenient for such a convoca-
tion; but probably the phrase should be struck from the text
{v. i.). — And all the prophets were prophesying before them] per-
haps by lifting up their voices in unison, or by certain dervish-like
manifestations of ecstasy (cf v. ")• — lO* Horns of iron] an em-
blem of offensive power (Dt. ;iy^ Am. 6'' Je. 48" Dn. 8^ f ).
Such symbols were customary with the prophets. Cf. Je. 27^
28"' «f- where Jeremiah wears a bar as a symbol of captivity and
Hananiah, a prophet of the type of Zedekiah, breaks it from off his
neck. — 12. Behold the prophets have with one mouth spoken'^ good
unto king] so (g (z'. i.). — 14. The first reply of Micaiah is clearly
398 2 CHRONICLES
ironical, although not without a touch of politeness in favouring the
Kmg's desire. — 16. This vision is usually (and correctly) taken to
indicate the outcome of the campaign : Ahab will fall and the peo-
ple will return home.
Ba. interprets differently. He renders Yahweh hath said, These have
a master who is no master, i.e., Ahab was-no shepherd but a spoiler of his
people, and Ba. thinks that the words in peace cannot fittingly apply to a
return of Israel home after a disaster in battle. The vision means, then,
that the man who has misgoverned Israel wDl not be permitted to lead
to victory.
18. Ahab would remove the depressing effect of the oracle upon
Jehoshaphat by insinuating that it proceeded from personal hos-
tility.— 19. Micaiah indicates his words by a vision showing how
Yahweh was leading Ahab to destruction through a spirit of false-
hood in the mouths of his prophets. The scene is of Yahweh as
a heavenly king holding a court or council. For Yahweh's method
of dealing with Ahab cf. Ps. iS"'' "6 b), — 20. The Hebrew allows
either a spirit or the spirit. If we read the former, one out of the
rest of the angelic beings who attend Yahweh, then we find here
in its most elementary form the doctrine of the later Jewish and
Christian Satan; but this interpretation is doubtful. The spirit is
the personified spirit of prophecy {cf. v. =2). The spirit, then,
which moved the four hundred prophets was the true spirit of
prophecy, though leading them into falsehood. The real deceiver
is Yahweh. Such a conception, however repugnant to us, was
agreeable to the Hebrew mind. Cf. Yahweh's hardening the heart,
Ex. 4^"' 73 9'2 iQi- 20- 27 iiioj sending an evil spirit between Abime-
lech and the men of Shechem, Ju. 9==; inciting David to wrong,
2 S. 24'. — 23. Zedekiah insultingly challenges Micaiah to vindi-
cate his prophecy. — 24. Micaiah accepts the challenge and says
that Zedekiah shall perceive its truth in the disaster which shall
overtake him, a fugitive hiding for his life. — On inner chamber, cf.
I K. 20'". — 25. Joash the king's son] not elsewhere mentioned.
— 26. Bread of affliction and water of affliction] i.e., bread and
water in scant measure, cf. Is. 30=". — 27. The test of prophecy ac-
cording to Micaiah is its fulfilment. Cf. v.^* Dt. 18=^' '•. — And he
said hear ye, etc.]. These words are a marginal gloss taken from
XVin. 1-34.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S ALLIANCE WITH AHAB 399
Mi. I', and form no part of the original narrative of i K. 22.
They were inserted by some one who identified Micaiah with
Micah, the prophet of the days of Hezekiah.
4. DVD] first of all, first, cf. Gn. 25^' i S. 5'" (Dr.) i K. i^i (Bur.).—
12T pn] wanting (6ba. — 5. jjn^a] i K. 22^ yaiNo. — ^SJ^] i K. i'^nh.
The latter, as the forms Snns and n*^]? show, is correct. — Sn] i K. hy. —
D^n^N.n] I K. 'JIN. The original in i K. was ^^^\ found in twenty-nine
Mss. (Ki. BH., St. SBOT.). The changes to "'J^^• and DTiSN-n were made
to avoid the association of nini with false prophets. — 6. inNc] inND the
reading of some mss. and also preferred by Ki. (BH.) and St. (SBOT.);
ditto in vv. ' '-. — 7. ny-\h vdi ho 'a naioS iS;? N2jnD urx] i K. 228
;n DN '»3 210 >Sy Naj.-i> nS. — xinj wanting in i K. — nSd-'] i K. nSni ;
ditto in V. ^. — 9. Dom] wanting in i K. 22"', evidently inserted to
make easier the reading pJ3 in a threshing-floor. (S of i K. has for
pj3 Dnj3 d-'^'^Sd only evonXoi. This Icjks as though pJ3 were a
dittography of Dnj3 (Bur., St. SBOT.) and thus had no place in the
text of K. Paul Haupt (SBOT.) thinks pj, from connection with Arabic
verb ^f^ to polish and Assyr. gurnu " coat," may mean polished
armour and that the word to be rejected is Dnja as a gloss. At any rate
the various proposed emendations, such as Dma embroidered (Be. after
Th.), 01133 >-\)2 (Ki. BH. after Klo.), p^l nJ3 (Bn.), seem not commend-
able.— 10. 1*^] used reflexively Ges. § 135/. — ~J>"J3] cf. i Ch. 7'". —
11. inji]. The obj. is understood.— 12. nai] read after ® iXdXrjaav
•nai Bur., Bn,, Ki. BH., et al. — iro] dageS forte conjunctive, Ges.
§ 20/. — inN3] I K. 22'3 -inN 1313. — 13. ■'n':'N] i K. 22" •'Sn r\^n\ (g, U,
"■^x Din'^N, which was probably the original in Ch. — 14. n3''a] shortened
from iniDiD. — l^i^] i K. 22'^ the same, and also '^■'nj instead of ''<-\r\n of
Ch., but nSxni r\h-;. ^abl in both K. and Ch. has all these verbs in the
sing. This probably was the original and the change to the plural has
been made by copyists to emphasise the presence of Jehoshaphat. —
D3T'3 unji;] I K. i^DH T13 mni |nji. — 15. icn] for use as conj. cf.
BDB. T^'N 8 a (/3). — 16. ph] fem. to agree with |nx. Some mss. have
on^, agreeing with Snt^\ — 17. ynS] i K. 2 2'8 j;t which Ki. {BH. not
SBOT.) adopts.— 18. p"?] (5 has Oi^x oiirws, I3 ah, both here and r K.
22'^ adopted by Th., Kau., Bn., Ki. in SBOT., Kom. The force would
be. My personal bias is not, as you charge, determining my words con-
cerning you, but your downfall is the purpose of Yahweh. — u'Ctt" ] i K. sg.
— o^'Diyn N3X] host of heaven, i.e., the organised body of angels or divine
beings with whom Yahweh associates, cf. Ne. g* Ps. 10321 1482 Is. 242'
Dn. 8'° Jos. 5"f-. — iSndi:'! irD'' Sp onDj;] i K. — i^sTtJ'ai ij''D"in vSj; idj?
— 19. Sn-i^'' i'^d] wanting in i K. 2220. — idn'] wanting in (Sabl and 1 K.
and to be struck out; a clear dittography from following IDX. At the
end of the verse (&^ has the addition Kal eJirev oi/rws Oi) dvvi^a-ei, also in
400 2 CHRONICLES
I K. with addition ko2 elirev 'Ev ffoi. — n33, hdd] i K. nsa. naa. — 20.
nnn] on art. with indefinite force cf. 20^^ and Ges. § 126(7. St.
(SBOT.) reads pji'n (c/'. Jb. i^^) and regards nnn as a substitutionary
gloss. This is favoured by Paul Haupt, who says nnn is " certainly not
the spirit of prophecy " {v. s.). The strongest argument in favour of
this view is the fact that nnn, a fern, noun, is here construed as masc,
but its use in v. -' seems fatal to the thought of an original ]a".rn. — 21.
nn"-] I K. 2222 nn.— 22. After ^sa read So after ®al g,_ -jj^ and i K.
2223. — 23. Tnn] wanting in i K. 22=% yet probably to be read there
(Klo., Kamp., Bn., Ki., Bur.) since nt w is never used of a verb. — l^i^]
"ins (Ki. BH.).— 25. inp] i K. 22=6 sg.— jisn] (g^ 'EfJ-vP, CS^^ ^efi/xvp,
also <JS of I K. (the 2 comes from preceding irpos), hence the name
probably was iss Immer {cf. i Ch. 9'2 24'^ Je. 20', et al. (Bur.)). — 26.
omcNi] (S^^ I K. 22" sg. — vnS D''21 yn*? on'^] examples of apposition
Dr. TH. § 189 (i), Ges. § 131c.— •'3v^'] i K. >Na.— 27. aSa . . . y;-cz''\
V. s. D''Dj? used very seldom, if ever, of Israel (v. Bur.).
28-34. The defeat of the allies. — 29. Ahab disguised himself
probably to escape a central attack such as was made on Jehosha-
phat, and also perhaps from the superstitious notion that by
changing his identity he could in some way escape the evil foretold
by Micaiah. — 31. And Jehoshaphat cried out'\ probably to his
men, but the Chronicler understood it as a prayer and added the
remainder of the verse, which does not appear in i K. 22.^ — 34.
Ahab's first impulse when wounded seems to have been to leave
the battle (v. '''>), but when he noted the fierceness of the fight he
had himself propped up in his chariot and kept his place against the
enemy. This is a splendid testimony to his prowess, even as one
also is given in the command of the King of Syria to fight only with
him (v. 5°). The Chronicler omits the details given in i K. 22^8-39
of Ahab's death and burial, because they would have been irrele-
vant in his narrative.
29. Niai B'onnn] either an example of inf. abs. used for the cohorta-
tive in excited speech Ges. § ii3<^^, or to be changed after Vrss. The
former is allowed by Bur., Bn., et al., but rejected by St., Sw. in SBOT.
on I K., which gives the latter reading after 05, &, Ol, NiaNi CijnnNi, pre-
ferred by Ki. BH., but (S*b of Ch. has KaraKaXvxpdu fif. — ^nJa] Q5 ?«)»
apparel. — in3m] about thirty MSS., 05, 13, i K. 223° sg. — 30. After h nir'N i
K. 22" has DiJif 1 cir'Sa'. — Vnjn nx] read after 05, i K. nm. — Snjn, japn]
I K. without art. — 31. ncs*] i K. 2232 + -|n. — laDM] i K. no'-i. The
former to be preferred (Klo., Ki., Bur., et al. — UCD . . . nn^] wanting
I
XIX. 1-3.] JEHOSHAPHAT REPROVED 401
in I K. — an^D'i] (^ airiffrpexpev aiiroiis probably reading on^D'i. M is far
more expressive. — 33. icn*?] in his integrity or his imiocency, i.e., without
guile or definite intention in view of the result, "at a venture," cf. 2 S.
15". — ]'<->Z'n poi O'pain ]^2] between the tassets and the breastplate.
pai in the sg. Is. 41" f- The plural of this word meaning cleaving, join-
ing is most appropriate for the tassets consisting of jointed pieces. —
231'^] I K. 2234 i2D-('^. — ijnNSini] I K. "'jN^sini. — njncn] (g nnnSon, proba-
bly the true reading. — 34. hn-\\vi iVm] i K. 2233 -^Scni. — n^DjJD] better
Hoph. after i K. — ti-ncn . . . nj?] i K. a-i]J3 pdii. At the titne of ike
going down of the sun is drawn from i K. 2235a.
XIX. 1-3. Jehoshaphat reproved for his alliance with Ahab
by the prophet Jehu. — A section clearly from the Chronicler.
The N. kingdom in the mind of the Chronicler was entirely apostate
from Yahweh, and hence the association of Jehoshaphat with
Ahab was completely sinful and worthy of rebuke. — 1. In peace]
with possible allusion to the words of Micaiah, 18"^. — 2. Jehu the
son of Hanani]. Cf. i K. 16' and, on Hanani, 2 Ch. 16'. The
Chronicler consistently introduces here Jehu, since Hanani his
father appears in the reign of Asa the father of Jehoshaphat; but
this does not exactly agree with i K. 16', where " Jehu son of Ha-
nani " appears prophesying against Baasha, some forty years earlier
than the death of Ahab. — The seer]. This term may apply either
to Hanani (as assumed in note on 16") or to Jehu (Ke., Oe., Kau.,
Ki. Kom.). — That hate Yahweh]. Whether sg. or pi. {v. i.), the
reference is clearly to Ahab. This historically is a total miscon-
ception of Ahab, who was a reverer of Yahweh, as is seen from his
summoning the prophets of Yahweh (iS^) and in the names of his
children Athaliah, Ahaziah, and Jehoram, which all are com-
pounds of Yahweh. — Wrath] spoken with reference to the in-
vasion of the Moabites and the Ammonites, c. 20 (Be., Ke., Zoe.,
Ba.). — 3. Good things]. Cf. 1212. — j^/^g Asheroth] a feminine
pi. occurring twice elsewhere (Ju. 3' prob. a text, error, 2 Ch.
ZZ^ t)> equivalent to Asherim {cf. 142 15'^). For this act of piety
by Jehoshaphat, cf. i7«. — And hast set thy heart to seek God]. Cf.
IT «.
2. •^v;^] cf. Ges. § ii^k. — ''Njc'?i] <g has sg. in agreement with W\^,
but the latter may be used collectively, cf. Ps. 9^- ''' <5. i6> lo^ Is. ii^ f. — ■
ans'n] finite verb continuing inf. cstr., Ges. § 114^. — 3. ^dn] cf. iK
26
402 2 CHRONICLES
4-11. The appointment of judges. — This section has already
been referred to in connection with 17'-', with the suggestion that a
tradition of historic value might underlie both. Yet on the other
hand one cannot escape the force of Wellhausen's view that the
story of Jehoshaphat's activity concerning the administration of
justice may be due to the meaning of his name, " Yahweh is Judge"
{Prol. p. 191). The Chronicler and those of his school felt called
upon to idealise the kings of Judah, and most naturally idealised
Jehoshaphat after the meaning of his name. They ascribed to
him the foundation of a system of courts corresponding perhaps
to those of their day (We. op. cit., Ki. Kom.) when in all proba-
bility a central sanhedrim existed at Jerusalem and local ones in
other cities. Yet the judiciary given as established by Jehosha-
phat corresponds very closely with that mentioned in Dt. i6'8-2''
178 and might well have been derived from that source. In Dt.
we read of judges in all thy gates (16"), and likewise of a court of
appeal at the central sanctuary, for if there arise a matter too hard
for thee in judgment . . . thou shalt come unto the priests the
Levites and unto the judge at the central sanctuary, i.e., Jerusalem
(Dt. 17"). All jurisdiction among the Hebrews was originally
invested in the family and administered by its head (Gn. 38^^^-
31'= cf. Dt. 2iisff). Then in more organised and settled life this
family authority was supplemented and restricted by a court com-
posed of the elders of the village or city (Dt. 19'^ 21= '■ ■<• «• '^ 22'^ «•).
Under the monarchy the king also was an administrator of justice
(2 S. 8'5 14^-16 15'- 3 f. 6 1 K. 3'- 1« " 7' Je. 22^5 f Is. 16^ Je. 235''). An
appeal apparently might be taken to him from a lower court, or
one might go to him in the first instance. The priests also, since
they were the mediators of divine law (Dt. ;^y> Je. iS'^ Ho. 4^ '■),
and thus of divine decisions, were always concerned somewhat
with the administration of justice (cf. Ex. 2i« 22''- » f i S. 2^^:
decisions at a sanctuary or from God would be delivered by a
priest, cf. also decisions of Moses, Ex. iS'^ f- i'-^^). When then
a central sanctuary was established, the chief priest naturally be-
came a supreme judge. An interesting feature of the description
of the judiciary, both here and in Dt., is the retirement of the king
personally into the background in the exercise of the function
3aX. 4-11.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S JUDICIARY 403
properly belonging to the sovereign. Dt. speaks of the judge and
the Chronicler gives this position to the ruler of the house of Jiidah.
Probably the king in Israel delegated the administration of justice,
although still held responsible for it, to others. Thus princes and
members of the royal house are frequently alluded to as exercising
judicial functions (Is. i" 3^ Mi. 3' Je. 21'"- 222^- Ez. 45').
4. And Jehoshaphat dwelt in Jerusalem] i.e., permanently. He
no longer visited the court of the N. kingdom, but for a time at
least confined himself to the sacred city and concerned himself
with the sacred business of justice. — And he went out again]. The
first time had been in the third year of his reign, when the commis-
sioners of the law were sent out (17^-')- — From Beersheha] the
southern limit of his kingdom {cf. i Ch. 21=) to the hill country of
Ephraim] the northern limit of his kingdom, acquired by conquest
(•c/. 17=). — And brought them back unto Yahweh]. Possibly an
apostasy from Yahweh is thought of in connection with the alliance
with northern Israel (c. 18); yet a similar activity is ascribed also to
Asa (i5^-'0- — 5. And he set judges, etc.]. V. s. — 6. For ye judge
not for man but for Yahweh]. The judges were representatives of
Yahweh {cf. Ex. iS'^f- 2i« Dt. i"). — 7. Take heed and act] i.e.,
take heed to act in pious awe of Yahweh. — For there is no iniquity
with Yahweh our God or respect of persons or taking of a bribe].
This insistence that the judge should be in these particulars like
unto Yahweh is worthy of notice. Cf. the description of Yahweh
as judge, Gn. 18=5 Dt. iC '-. — 8. A higher court is established at
Jerusalem with jurisdiction in both religious and civil cases {v. s.).
The former are expressed under the judgment of the Yahweh and
the latter under controversies. Under the first expression also the
Chronicler may have meant those cases to be decided according to
the Pentateuch, which he believed already then to have been writ-
ten, and under the second, cases requiring arbitration simply. The
latter might well fall to the care of the heads of the fathers houses of
Israel, i.e., the lay members of the court. On Israel representing
the S. kingdom, c/. 12^ — And for the controversies of the inhabitants
of Jerusalem*]. These controversies are not to be considered re-
stricted to those of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, yet they presented
their causes directly to this higher court. — 10. The cases which
404 2 CHRONICLES
might come from other places before the court are now somewhat
awkwardly enumerated. — Between blood and blood] i.e., whether a
man might be guilty of murder or only of manslaughter {cf. Ex.
2112-u). — Between law and commandment, statutes and judgments]
i.e., under what laws cases should be judged, covering thus also all
questions of the interpretation of the law. — 11. Amariah the chief
priest]. Amariah is mentioned in i Ch. 5" (6") as the third chief
priest after the first in the Temple (see corrected text), hence he
would come in appropriately in the reign of Jehoshaphat. — In all
matters of Yahweh] i.e., in all religious or ecclesiastical matters, cf.
V. 8. — Zebadiah the son of Ishmael] otherwise unkno\Mi. In 17^
a Levite among the commissioners to teach the law has the same
name. — The ruler of the house of Jndah]. The Chronicler thinks
of the old tribal organisation with its head apart from the king
being preserved. — All the king^s matters] i.e., civil cases coming
under the king's jurisdiction; the controversies of v. ^
5. ^^•']!^ '\-'-;h] for every city, cf. I Ch. 2612 (1. 124). — 6, tODCD -\2-i3 C3C>*i].
(B read nai for "^3^a; U ei qiwdciunque jiidicaveritis, in vos redutidahit.
Oe. emended 1312 to i3"»3 " and it shall be with you according to (your)
judgment." Better supply Yahweh as subject (Ke., ei a/.). — 7. N-^'cf]
cf. C'JD Ni;'^ in Dt. io'".^8. n'^C'n'« u;;"!]. These newly appointed judges
could not be described as " returning " to Jerusalem, hence Kimchi,
Be., Ke., et al. referred the words to the statement in v. ^ Dj?a nxm; but
then this statement should precede v. S" and the pi. must be explained
on the rather doubtful assumption that Jehoshaphat and his retinue con-
stitute the subject, although the sg. is used in v. K Better follow 05, H,
and read Ott", and before it ^?"'"}'ri and for the controversks of the inhabi-
tants of Jerusalem, so Kau., Bn., Ki. — 10. 2n '?3i] casus pendens, cf.
Ges. § i43<f. (S, B, omit 1. — 'h . . . yz} cf. Gn. i^. — cr- inim] perhaps
an Aram, loan-word; mostly in Ez. and Ec, and only here in Ch.
XX. 1-30. The victory over the Moabites and the Am-
monites.— A religious tale of great marvel. The only history back
of this story probably is the fact that Jehoshaphat, associated with
Jehoram, was engaged in a campaign against the Moabites. This
campaign is described in one way in 2 K. 3^-", where it is embel-
lished with wonders to the glorification of Elisha the prophet of
northern Israel; here the campaign wholly transformed is described
in another way, and all semblance to historical reality is lost; only
J
XX. 1-30.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S VICTORY 405
the Moahites remain as the enemies of Israel. Jehoshaphat is no
longer associated with Jehoram, nor yet is he the attacking party,
but is suffering invasion in his own land; his army also does not
fight, but only prays (w. '^-w). Edifying prayers and prophetic
admonitions (vv. ^ff. hs.)^ and a startling wonder from Yahweh
(w. 22 11.)^ which at the same time serves to show the importance
of the worship of Yahweh through the Levites with services of
song, are the principal features of the narrative. The influence
of the prophetic tale of 2 K. may be seen in the feature of the
self-destruction of enemies which appears in both {cf. 2 K. 3^3
with V. =3).
An attempt to defend the historicity of this narrative has been made by
assuming an invasion of three kindred tribes to settle in westenn Palestine,
coming by way of the southern end of the Dead Sea, harassed by the popu-
lation of that district and ruptured {sic destroyed) by internal dissensions,
and leaving a very great spoil, because, coming to settle, they brought all
their property with them (Ba. Com. p. xxxi.). But in view of the
thoroughly Midrashic character of the narrative such conjectures are
idle.
1-4. The invasion. — 1. After this] i.e., after the events de-
scribed in the previous chapter, where Jehoshaphat is represented
•
engaged in works of piety and peace. — Tlie sons of Moab and the
sons of Amnion and the Metmim^] (v. i.). The last people, so
named from Ma' an, a city south of the Dead Sea, or representing an
Arabian people {cf. i Ch. 4^'), appear as/Zie children or inhabitants
of Mount Seir in vv. '"■ 22. 23^ — 2. The sea] i.e., the Dead Sea. — From
Edom^] (v.i.). This reading Edom instead of Syria (^, RV.)
requires only the change of a single consonant (DHS becoming
D"iS). Syria lies far to the north of the Dead Sea, while Edom lies
immediately to the south and south-east of the sea,. — Hazazon-
tamar] (Gn. 14' f) on the basis of this verse identified with
En-gedi (Jos. 15" i S. 23=' Ct. V* Ez. 47'° f); mod. Ain Jidi,
overlooking the western shore of the Dead Sea, 680 feet below
the sea-level and 612 above that of the lake (EBi. II. col. 1293).
There is little doubt but that this identification is correct. The
name Hazazon seems preserved in the Wady Husaseh north-west
of En-gedi. Tamar, meaning palm-tree, is very appropriate.
4o6
2 CHRONICLES
Palm-trees are known to have flourished there (mentioned by
Josephus, Ant. ix. i, 2, and Pliny, HN^. V. 15 (17)). The sug-
gestion of the identification of H azazon-tamar with Tamar of Ez.
47 '3 to the south-west of the Dead Sea (DB.) has little in its
favour. A pass leads from En-gedi up into the hill-countrj' of
Judah. For a description of the route of this invading army, see
GAS. HGHL. p. 172. — 3. And proclaimed a fast\ This was
usual in view of any impending calamity (Jon. y °) and involved
the assembling of the people (i K. 21'- '= Je. 36«- ' Jo. 2'").
1. B''jic>;nc]. Since the Ammonites are already mentioned in this verse,
and since three groups of people are mentioned in vv. '"-^s 24, read
D''Ji>.=^n with CS M[€]ti'a/wv, so Be., Ke., et al., cf. 26', i Ch. 4^'. — 2.
1N3^1] used as the French on and the German wa«, v. Ges. § 144/. —
pen] other mss. psn, great number a late usage, cj. i Ch. 29'^. — ci.v:]
also in OS, but improbable here. Read dind with most commentators
{v. s.). S*, t"^"rLw 1.:a-5, seems to have read d-;n. — 3. Via . . .]r^^]he
set his face, i.e., he determined, equivalent to v:3 . . ■ cu'm in 2 K. 12'^
— 4. t'p^'-'] to ask, request, a. late use of ^p2 only here with no ace. of
the thing.
5-13. Jehoshaphat's prayer. — This prayer contains the fol-
lowing elements: (i) an invocation of Yahweh as all-powerful
(v. ^); (2) the land now threatened had been given by him as a
perpetual possession (v.'); (3) a sanctuary has been built in this
land for him, with faith in his presence to deliver in every time of
need (\'v. ^'■); (4) these enemies are requiting evil for good upon
this his land (\^. '" '■); (5) Israel is powerless before these enemies
and can only look unto him for help (v. '2).
5. Before the new court] i.e., directly in front of the Temple,
toward which Jehoshaphat prayed, on the inner side of the outer
court where the people were assembled (cf. 4' Ez. 46' -2). This
outer court was called neu' not because restored or extended under
Asa or Jehoshaphat (Ke., Zoe.), since it did not properly exist at
that time (cf. 4'), but probably because when the second Temple
was built it was recognised as new, and this name clung to it even
until the time of the Chronicler. — 6. God in the heavens'] an ex-
pression of di\ine omnipotence (cf. Dt. 4" Jos. 2" Ps. 115'). — 7.
Abraham thy friend]. Cf. Is. 41'. — 9. If evil come upon tts, etc.]
XX. 1-30.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S VICTORY 407
a brief summary of the cases in Solomon's dedicatory prayer
in which Yahweh would hear the people's cry, cj. 6^^^". — 10. And
ynonnt Seir\. With the Moabites and Ammonites were joined also
Edomites {cf. v. '). — Whom thou didst not allow Israel to invade,
etc.]. According to Dt. 2^' Nu. 20'^ -2', the children of Israel,
on the journey to Canaan, were forbidden to contend with the
Edomites or the Moabites or to take their land. — 11. To cast us
out of thy possession]. The invading hosts are represented as pur-
posing to make a permanent settlement in Judah. — 12. The atti-
tude of complete helplessness assumed by Jehoshaphat in spite of
his great army (i7>'-") reminds one of the similar wa-il raised by
Joshua after the defeat at Ai (Jos. 7'). — 13. In their distress the
entire population has gathered to intercede with Yahweh (cf. Jo.
2'6 Jon. 3O.
5. aSi^n^i] nine MSS. and C5 'o. — 6. D>ijn ni3^eD J] cf. Is. i^^ The
usual expression of the Chronicler is niX"iNn mD^CD, i Ch. 29'° 2 Ch.
128 17^0 2o29. — 8. •\^] omitted by (B^^, TS, probably because of the
following ^D^r'7. — tinpn] used to designate Temple and precincts also in
I Ch. 22'8. — 9. JO'iflU'] if correct, jtidgmettt, so (I. H gladius judicii is
followed by Ki. Reading dub., only here and possibly in pi. diioidk' in
Ez 23'°, but also dub. there, v. Toy, Cor. — niDj?j] cohortative in the
apodosis of a conditional sentence, v. Ges. § 108/. — 11. iPiin-'c] (^
KKijpovofxlas Tj/xuiv. Doubtless l| is original, since the Chronicler
regards the kingdom as belonging to Yahweh, cf. i Ch. 17'^ (cp, 2 S.
7'") 28=' 2q"- 2Sj and (S could easily arise from the reading of ^, but not
vice versa. — 13. onijji on-'U': ODto dj]. Bn. after ® supplies 1 before
DH'tfj and strikes out Dn'>j3i as unsuitable after D2!3. Ki. Kom. con-
siders DDQ a gloss, but IB IS used with DTiijai on^ja in ^i^^, and with
nSinai iinj in Ez. 9^. & adds Dn\-iij2i, possibly original, but may have
been added merely for completeness. Hence it is sufficient to supply
iwith (S.
14-19. The assuring promise of Jahaziel. — Jehoshaphat's
prayer is answered by a promise of deliverance from Yahweh
through Jahaziel, a Levite of the sons of Asaph. — 14. Jahaziel the
son, etc.]. On the occurrence of the name Jahaziel, cf. 1 Ch. I6^
The appearance of a Levite singer as a prophet is noticeable, yet
fully in accord with the entire description which gives such a large
place to worship, and especially to the use of praise, in gaining the
4o8 2 CHRONICLES
victory (\^'.'"- 2' '•, f/. also v. =»). — MaUaniaJi]. In i Ch. 25^
this name appears among the sons of Heman, and its frequent oc-
currence elsewhere shows that it represented persons or a person
or family of importance in early post-exilic Judaism. Mattaniah
appears as a son of Asaph, with the connecting link Micah in the
pedigree of Uzzi, an overseer of the Levites at Jerusalem (Ne.
II"), and also with the further link Zaccur in the pedigi-ee of a
Zechariah, a musician who took part in the dedication of Jerusa-
lem Ne. 12". Mattaniah with this same connection also, though
written Zichri and Zabdi instead of Zaccur, appears among the
post-exilic inhabitants of Jerusalem (i Ch. 9'= Ne. 11'"). — Sons of
Asaph]. Cf. I Ch. 618-32 (33-47). — U pon him was the spirit of Yah-
u'eh\ Cf. 15'. — 15. For the battle is not yours but God's']. Cf.
I S. 17". — 16. By the ascent of Ziz] not mentioned elsewhere;
probably Ziz should be read Haziz {v. i.), and the locality is the
Wady Hasasa {v. i. and v. -). — Wilderness of J cruel] unidenti-
fied, probably to the south-east of the wilderness of Tekoa (v. '^),
toward Wady Hasasa. — 17. Take your place, stand still and see
the salvation of Yahifeh]. These words, omitting stand still, are
found in Ex. i4'3 in Moses' address to the children of Israel at the
shore of the Red Sea. — 18. Both Jehoshaphat and the people in
thanksgiving for the glorious promise reverently prostrate them-
selves upon the ground. — 19. And the Lci'ites . . . stood up to
praise Yahweh] possibly while the rest of the people were pros-
trating themselves or remaining for the time being prostrate. The
Levites are naturally mentioned in connection with praise to Yah-
weh, since the assembly is in the court of the Temple (v. ^) and they
would be on hand for such a service. — Sons of Kehath] one of
the three great clan divisions of the Levites {cf. i Ch. 63- '■ 's- ^e ds. 22.
33. 61) 1^5 2 Ch. 20" 34>=, without sons, i.e., Kehathites i Ch. 63' (s^)).
They are not elsewhere spoken of as singers and probably are
mentioned here because the sons of Korah (read even of the sons
of Korah) were properly a subordinate family of the Kehath-
ites, since Korah in the genealogies is a grandson of Kehath
(i Ch. 6'- "f- (22- 37(.)). The sons of Korah, on the other hand,
from their mention in the titles of the eleven Pss. (42-49,
84, 85, 87, 88), were clearly a guild of singers, probably that
XX. 1-30.] JEHOSHAPHAT'S VICTORY 409
which was represented by Heman (i Ch. 6'8 (33)) (y^ also on i
Ch. 26').
14. "-N-nn^i] (gBA Kal tQ 'Of(e)i^X, cf. i Ch. 2319.— Ss^y^] (ge 'EXea^X,
A 'EXeTjX may indicate Sn^Sn, but are probably corrupt. — 16 . f''?!' f]
(gB 'Ao-ae, L AfftcTtt, other MSS. Acro-ts. n is probably a radical and
may be a corruption of n, cf. Wady Hasdsd and plateau Hasdsd, cf.
Buhl, GAP. p. g-j.—e]-\DX] end, late synon. of VQ (BDB.). Elsewhere
Jo. 220 Ec. 3" 72 i2'3.— SNn> t] fou7ided of God, (B /ept7;X = '7X'i;.
20-30. The victory and the spoil.— On the day following the
assembly at the Temple the people marched forth into the wilder-
ness of Tekoa, some fourteen miles south of Jerusalem, and with
singers at their head, approached the invading hosts. When
the singers began to sing, unseen agencies caused the invaders to
turn one against the other until they were completely destroyed, so
that Jehoshaphat and his people found only a slain host, from
which they secured immense and valuable booty requiring three
days for its gathering. On the fourth day, after assembling in a
valley, where they blessed Yahweh and thus called the place the
Valley of Blessing, they returned with music unto the Temple; and
through the fear of Yahweh from the report of this victory among
the surrounding countries rest and quiet came to the kingdom of
Jehoshaphat.
20. The wilderness of Tekoa'\ the open country around Tekoa
{if. I Ch. 2=^). — Believe ye in Yahweh your God so shall ye be estab-
lished^. Isaiah used the same words applied negatively in his ad-
dress to Ahaz (Is. 7«). — 21. In holy attire] i.e., in priestly garments
{cf. I Ch. 16"). The singers probably are to be thought of as Levites
of the Temple service. — Give thanks unto Yahweh, etc.] a direct
refrain often found in the Psalms, but always with the additional
words (after Yahweh) for he is good, which have been omitted
either by a copyist or more likely because familiar, and hence
readily supplied {rf. 1 Ch. 16^^). — 22. Liers-in-wait] not Jude-
ans by the suggestion of Yahweh (as in Jos. 8^) (Ba.), since they
were not to fight (v. "), nor a portion of the invading host, the men
of Seir thus conspiring against the Moabites and Ammonites {cf.
v.") (Ke., Zoe., H-J.), but supernatural divine agencies (Be., Oe.,
4IO
2 CHRONICLES
Bn.), which suddenly coming upon the advancing host or taking
possession of them, caused them to- be enraged against one an-
other in deadly combat (v. ") — a means not unlike that of the lying
spirit in the mouth of Ahab's prophets (r/. iS^' '•). — And they were
smitten] i.e., defeated and destroyed — a summary of that which is
described in the next verse. — 23. For the children of Amnion and
Moab stood up against the inhabitants, etc.]. Cf. Ju. 7" i S. 14^"
2 K. 3=3. Such internecine strife caused by Yahweh appears also
in the later prophets in the future destruction of the enemies of
Israel (cf. Ez. 38^' Hg. 2" Zc. i4'0- — 24. And when Judah came
upon an outlook point of the wilderness]. The writer pictures
Jehoshaphat and his men advancing toward the invading host and
then from some elevation seeing the host all lying slain.- — 25. They
found cattle^ in ahundance and goods {i.e., the general stuff of such
an invading host) and garments'^ and precious things (such as arms,
utensils, ornaments, or any wrought article)]. Cf. the spoil taken
from Zerah's host (14'^ «•) and from the Midianites (Ju. 8" ^ ). —
26. In the valley of Berakah] i.e., in the valley of Blessing. This
name appears preserved in both Berekut, an abandoned village
west of Tekoa, containing ruins of great age (Buhl, GAP. p. 97),
and in a Wadi Bereikut near Tekoa (Be., Bn.). — 27. Then .all
the men of Judah and Jerusalem journeyed back with Jehoshaphat
at their head returning to Jerusalem with joy since Yahweh had
caused them to rejoice over their enemies]. Cf. on last clause Ezr.
6^2 Ne. 12".— 28. And the fear of God, etc.]. Cf. 17'°.— 29. And
his God gave him rest round about]. Cf. 14" '■ 15'^
20. ■'jiycr] cf. I Ch. 282. — liSNHi . . . ijiCNn] weak 1 used with the
imperfect to express the design or purpose of a preceding act (Dr.
TH. § 60); for imperative followed by imperfect, v. Koe. iii. § 364I.
Niph. so used after Hiph. also in Is. 7«. — 21. VV''''"] with Ss also in 2 K.
68. — nny>i] meaning appoint late, cf. i Ch. 6'« (1. 89). — i:np n-nnS] cf.
I Ch. 16". — '-h nm] thirteen mss., g> add 3iB 13. — 22. nj;a] with retro-
spective omitted, v. Ges. § 155/. — nSnm nj-13] Bue. (ZAW. '99, p.
100 n.) proposes the reading nSism nna (i K. 8-^ Je. 7's- 11'^) and
considers the phrase equivalent to ipyxM in 2 Ch. 13". Whilst the
word is not elsewhere joined with nSnn, its use with n-iin in Ps. 425
supports the usage here, mm is used parallel to ^^^n, cf. Ps. 100'. —
24 . noscn] outlook point, as a common noun also in Is. 2 1 ^ f. By a
XX. 31-37.] END OF JEHOSHAPHAT'S REIGN 4II
peculiar Heb. idiom the article is used to designate a thing, primarily
yet unknown but present in the writer's mind as a definite object, i.e.,
the Chronicler vividly pictured Jehoshaphat's march to its destination, a
certain high vantage-point in the wilderness which becomes the definite
point to him, cf. Ges. § i26q.r, also Bur. on i K. 13'''. — pnnn] cf. i Ch.
29's. — 25. li'^D•\] cf. I Ch. 27". — ana] <Bkt-^vt}= nnna, which read since
1 before tJ'i3T also supports this reading, so Kau., Bn., Ki. — anjo]
very improbable in this context, hence read with seven mss., U, D>tJ3i, so
Be., Kau., Ki., Bn. — nncn ^Sd] a phrase occurring only here, cf. :intD mien
Ezr. 8", also the similar phrase rrjcn iSd 2 Ch. 32" 361" Ho. i3'6 Na. 2'"
Je. 25'^ Dn. II*. HTicn only occurs in pi. — ncd j-n'^] (g omits, to not
lifting tip, i.e., so much that they could not carry the booty away: an
idiom peculiar to the Chronicler, cf. 14'^ i Ch. 22''. — 29. mxiNn pidSdd]
cf. I Ch. 293", also V. s. on v. ^.
31-34. The summary of Jehoshaphat's reign. — From i K.
22«-45 with some variations {v. i.). — 31. And Jehoshaphat reigned
over Jtid<ih\ This apparently superfluous statement is due to the
Chronicler's source, i K. 22"", a verse marking the beginning of the
narrative of the reign of Jehoshaphat where it says {He) began to
reign over Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel, but the
Chronicler will not date the accession of a king of Judah by a year
of the ungodly king of the schismatic N. kingdom. The remainder
of this verse is essentially identical with i K. 22". — Azubah] the
name also of a reputed wife of Caleb (cf. i Ch. 2^^^-). — Shilhi •{•].
Nothing further is known of this father and his daughter. — 32.
A 7id he walked in the way of A sa his father]. Cf. 1 7 ' ' ■ . — 33. How-
beit the high places were not taken away]. This statement from i
K. 22" is not exactly consistent with 17* (q. v.) and the Chronicler's
entire description of Jehoshaphat's piety. — Neither as yet, etc.]
I K. 22" f- The people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high
places. The Chronicler found this positive statement too strong
and modified it with a milder negative one. — 34. Now the rest of
the acts of Jehoshaphat the first and the last] the Chronicler's
usual formula {cf. i2'5). — In the acts (words)] not an inde-
pendent work written by Jehu the son of Hanani {cf 192), but a
section of the Book of the Kings of Israel containing his name {v.
Intro, pp. 21/).
31. Bssa'in'i ^'?D>1] i K. 22<i iSn ndn ]2 'hm. The Chronicler, as
usual, omits the synchronistic statement of K. — 32. 1')'\2] i K. 22*'
412 2 CHRONICLES
TIT Sd3. — XDN V2N] I K. transposes. — njcc] i K. masc. 1J^^c. ^n occurs
both as masc. and fern. — 33. anipaN ihSmS aa^S ij''3n nS uyn -\v;-\] i K.
22" .^1233 antapci D-'narn Dj?n "iij?. — 34. ri^:jn] if the text is correct, Hoph.
perf. used only here in sense he taken up into, or inserted in. On form
cj. Ju. 6^ Na. 2', Ges. § 63/1. CI Kar^ypa^ev, TJ digesset, B •.'^^Ks^.
The similar phrase in 32" omits this word, which probably arose here
from a dittography of following '7y.
35-37. The destruction of Jehoshaphat's fleet. — From i K.
2 2J9 f- (48 f.)^ quite rewritten. This passage in i K. is not entirely
clear, but its present text was before the Chronicler. This relates
that Jehoshaphat built ships of Tarshish (i.e., a particular kind) to
sail to Ophir for gold, but the vessels were wrecked. Then Ahaziah
proposed to join with Jehoshaphat in this marine undertaking,
but Jehoshaphat declined the alliance. The Chronicler, on the
other hand, places Jehoshaphat in alliance with Ahaziah, a very
wicked king, and relates that they jointly built ships to go to Tar-
shish and that the ships were wrecked because Jehoshaphat had
allied himself with Ahaziah. The calamity then befalling the good
king Jehoshaphat in the loss of his vessels is explained through his
sin of allying himself with a king of Israel. Attempts have been
made to harmonise the two narratives on the ground of their incom-
pleteness. Thus Jehoshaphat accepted the aid of the King of
Israel in building but not in navigating the ships (Ba.). — 35. And
after this] i.e., after the marvellous deliverance recorded in vv. '-s'.
No time limit is given in i K., but the statement Jehoshaphat made
ships immediately follows the statement (i K. 22^^ <"> omitted by
the Chronicler) and there was no king in Edom : a deputy was king,
i.e., Edom was still controlled by Judah, hence shipbuilding was
undertaken by Jehoshaphat on the Gulf of Akabah south of Edom.
— The time in Jehoshaphat's reign is fixed by the mention of
Ahaziah the immediate successor of Ahab, who reigned only some
two years. — The same did very wickedly] a statement of the
Chronicler to emphasise the sin of Jehoshaphat's alliance. — 36.
To go to Tarshish] i K. 22^5 (^s) ships of Tarshish, i.e., a class of
ships used in the Tarshish trade, but the Chronicler misunderstood
the meaning of the phrase and assumed that they were to go to
Tarshish {cf. 921). In i K. 22^' <^«) the destination of the ships is
XXI. 1-20.] REIGN OF JEHORAM 413
Ophir, and their object to procure gold. — Tarshish]. Cf. i Ch.
I'. — Ezion-geber]. Cf. 8'^ In Kings tlie place where the ships
were built is not mentioned. — 37. Eliezer the son of Dodavahu-\\
Nothing further is known of this prophet, who is not mentioned
elsewhere. — Mareshah]. Cf. i Ch. 2«. — Yahweh hath broken in
pieces thy works^ i.e., the ships. According to i K. 22^' '"' they
were wrecked at Ezion-geber.
35. -lannx] only here as Hithp. perf. The prefix hn instead of vr} is
due to the influence of Western Aram. (Ges. § 54a n.), hence is late.
Hithp. is also used in v. " Dn. 1 1^- 23 the last also in an Aram. form. —
Nin] d read Nini. — 36. K';j>i . . . mt:'j;'? my iman^] i K. 22" iifj? taari.Ti
(read nB-j; '1). — a'vj-in t\2^^ n^jx ] i K. rniflis hd'^S r^trin niijN. — vryi]
<S, 21, read sg. — 37. ini-;-\3 <S (ba fi5(e)ta, l AouSioy) probably read either
nnn or innvi, — ]nfl] prophetic perfect, Ges. § io6n. — nvjx n^^M] i K.
22" nvjN maa'j >d. — nvjx] (& to. nXoid a-ov, so also ?C. — nxy] plus inf.
tv be able to (late), cf. 2^ 14'° i Ch. 29".
XXI. The reign of Jehoram (c 851-843 b.c.).— The Chron-
icler introduces his account of this reign with the verse in i K.
(22^") concluding the summary of the reign of Jehoshaphat (21').
He then mentions the other sons of Jehoshaphat (v. ^), their father's
generous treatment of them (v. '), and their destruction by Jehoram
after he came to the throne. These particulars are not related in
I K. Then is given the account of Jehoram's accession and evil
character, taken from 2 K. S'^" (vv. 6-'), and the account of the
revolt of Edom, taken from 2 K. 820-22 (^yy. 8.io)_ fhe remainder of
the narrative, which consists of a threatening letter from Elijah
(vv. '2-15)^ an account of a sack of Jerusalem by the Philistines and
others (vv. '^ '■), and an account of Jehoram's horrible end through
disease (vv. '8-20)^ jg independent of i and 2 K. This new material
seems to be either embellished traditions or history simply imagined
in a way suitable, according to the Chronicler's theory, to the evil
character of Jehoram.
Ki. following Bn. assigns vv. 2-4 to the Chronicler's forerunner (Bn.
non-canonical) and vv. '2-20 to M, but these verses have all the marks of
the style of the Chronicler. Be. maintained, but without sufficient
reason, that Elijah's letter had marks of another writer, mentioning the
Hiph. of njr v. '^ and v." elsewhere not in Ch. (but the occurrence in
41 4 2 CHRONICLES
v." certainly offsets the occurrence in the letter), the rare pi. D"Vn
(v. ») and n'^ni? (v. '^ Pr. i8" f) and the expression nSnj hdjs ^JJ ■i''^'
not elsewhere in Ch. Graf argued correctly, on the other hand, the
appearance of expressions used by the Chronicler elsewhere, 1ti3 -|'^n
vv. '2f.j cf. ii" 172 20^= 21^ 22' 28- 34'^ (the exjjression yet is too common
on which to lay weight), jnhk rf j v. ", cf. v. " v. ' 225- ^- ^, and cf. in v. '^
the parallelisms with v. " (in the former probably read D'j?"\ instead of
D^3T Ki. BH.). — Marks of the Chronicler in other verses: ':' prefixed
V.3; pinp'' v.* {cf. I'); nn PN nini ij;m v." {cf. 3322 i Ch. 526 Ezr.
16); </je Philistines and Arabians v. >6, c/. 17"; n<31D pxS (1. 132) v.'*.
1-7. Jehoram's accession and character. — Vv. 2 4 are without
parallels in Kings. — 1. Slept with his fathers, etc.]. Cf. g^K — 2.
Azariah]. The second of this name should be struck out (v. i.). —
Israel] used for the S. kingdom, also in v. ■*, cf. 12^ — 3. And
their father gave, etc.]. Cf. the somewhat similar treatment by
Rehoboam of his sons. — Because he was the first born] mentioned
as though Jehoram had no other special qualification to be his
father's successor. — Slew all his brethren, etc.] because of their
non-concurrence with his and his wife's (Athaliah's) idolatry (cf.
V. ") (Ke., Zoe.), probably from tyrannical jealousy (Oe.); but all
explanations are mere conjectures. — 5-7. Parallel with 2 K. 8'^".
— 6. According to that which the hoiise of Ahab did] i.e., according
to the doings of the house of Ahab. — The daughter of Ahab]. Cf.
18'. — 7. House of David]. 2 K. 8" has /»(fa/?. The Chronicler
may have made the change because he felt on account of the
Captivity that the Davidic promise was restricted to the Davidic
house. — ^l^ Jie promised to give a lamp to him a?id his children
alway]. The Chronicler uses the lamp as a figure of life (cf. Jb.
18" Pr. 133 242"), i.e., that the seed of David should never be de-
stroyed (2 S. 7'2-")..
1. vn^K Oj?2] so also i K. 22", where probably a dittography; omitted
by (SB in both places, rightly in i K. (St. 550r.).— "I'n n^'j] i K.
-|- V3N which the Chronicler omitted because of the preceding dittog-
raphy.— 2. tafl-'in^] (B + ^^ = ^t"C' may be original, since in accord
with the Chronicler's habit, cf. 1 Ch. 2^ 3^ » 7" 25^ 6 et al., but the
original list probably contained only one Azariah, hence a name has
disappeared if this numeral was originally in the text. — 7Nit:"] about
forty MSS. and the Vrss. m•l^^, which is followed by Ki., but Israel is used
for Judah in v.* 2%" and elsewhere, and the change to Judah is easier
XXI. 1-20.] REIGN OF JEHORAM 415
than the reverse.— 3. nmjn] always pi., cj. 32^3 Ezr. i« Gn. 24^3 \.—
6. '•sSd] S" /3a(rt\€ws may render a text from which 1 had fallen by
haplog., but ^'5'ii'AL have ^aaiXewv, which is doubtless original (8. — ■
nt'N] some mss. and 2 K. 8's ntrN^?.— 7. mo nt:'t< nnan jynS -im P'-a ns
TinS] 2 K. 8'* njy in ijjdS min> pn (i;. 5.). — rjaSi] 2 K. vjaS, which
is likely an error for vjoS, cf. i K. ii's, so Klo., Kamp., e/ c/. The
Chronicler sought to give a smoother reading to the corrupt text of 2 K.
by prefixing i.
8-10. The revolt of Edom. — With minor changes and slight
omissions, from 2 K. 8-^°-22. V. '^ (2 K. S^'^) is of doubtful mean-
ing.— 8. In his days Edom revolted]. Edom was subdued by
David, 2 S. 8'= '• i Ch. iS"-'', and, unless for a time it regained its
independence during the reign of Solomon (cf. i K. iV*^-, Noeldeke,
EBi. II. col. 1 184), it remained subject to the united kingdom and
Judah until the reign of Jehoram and the event here described.
During the reign of Jehoshaphat it was clearly subject to Judah, as
the account of his ship-building operations shows (cf. 20^'^).— 9. And
Jehoram passed over, etc.] entered Edom with his army to sub-
due it. — And he rose by night, etc.]. The sequel (v. 1°) shows that
the expedition of Jehoram was a failure, and hence an account of a
defeat must have been contained in the primary source of v.^^
(2 K. S^"'). Possibly it read, "And Edom arose by night and en-
compassed him and smote him and the captains of the chariots"
(Stade, Gesch. I. p. 537 n. i, and ZAW. XXI. pp. 337/.).— 10.
Unto this day] words of 2 K. 8=^, and simply quoted by the
Chronicler because in his source. — Libnah] a town not f»ar from
Lachish, on the south-western border of Judah near Philistia {cf. i
Ch. 6<= <">). Since it is said to have revolted, it has been regarded
as a Philistine city (Sk.), but it was reckoned as a priestly city
(Jos. 21"). Sennacherib besieged it (2 K. 19^).
9, v-^y U';'[ 2 K. S^' m^yx elsewhere unknown and probably a cor-
-mption of n-j^^ir, which the Chronicler misread v-\z\ so Be., Zoe., Oe.
Ki. corrects from 2 K., but it is difficult to see how the present text of
Ch. could have come from m^i's. — 3Dnn2] 2 K. + vShnS D;n on.
— 10. '1JI n> nnnn] wanting in 2 K. 8".
11-15. The letter of Elijah. — A pure product of the imagina-
tion, since Elijah had nothing to do with the S. kingdom, and
4l6 2 CHRONICLES
clearly was not living at this time (2 K. 3"" ), although such an
inference might have been drawn from 2 K. V\ From its literary
correspondence with the rest of the chapter, the letter was probably
written by the same author. The motive of the letter is to heighten
Jehoram's character as an obstinate and outrageous sinner, since
he had neglected to heed a divine warning of the calamities which
afterward befell him. — 11. Moreover he made, etc.] i.e., in addition
to his wickedness described in v. % which may be taken as the sup-
posed cause of the revolt of Edom, Jehoram directly institutes
high places, or seats of idolatrous worship (r/. 14^). — To play the
harlot] i.e., to worship deities other than Yahv/eh. The people
were thought of as married to their God, and any foreign worship
was regarded as whoredom or harlotry. (Cf. i Ch. 5".) — 12. In
the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father nor in the ways of Asa king of
Judah]. Both Jehoshaphat and Asa are regarded as especially good
kings (cf 14' <2) 173 2o52). — 13. Like as the house of Ahab caused
harlotry]. Ahab through the influence of his wife, Jezebel, was
potent in introducing the worship of foreign gods in Israel (cf. i K.
i63i a.) — jifjd qIsq iiQs slain thy brethren]. Cf. v.". — 14. With a
great stroke]. The reference is to the calamity of w. '«'-. — 15.
And thou shall have great sickness, etc.] the disease described in
w. 1* '■. — Day by day] i.e., a prolonged sickness.
11. ^-\ri2] (S, IS, read nya and so Kau., Bn., Ki. — jtm] on form cf.
Ges. § 75^^. — n-i>"j thrust aside from Yahweh to idolatry, cf. Dt. 13^-
11. 14. — 12. -ia>N nnn] because that, cf. Nu. 25" Dt. 21" 22=9 28" i S. 26=1
2 K. 22'' = 2 Ch. 34=5 Is. 5312 Je. 29'9 50'. — 13. T'ax n^3] (g i;toi>s
irarpds (Tov — '« ^J3, and so ^ (following (S); this is the stronger
expression, hence may be original, cf. v. 2. — 14. r]jj] (^^ T^^ §^ add ^r-s
but a special punishment for the King himself is narrated in v. 's. —
nsja] stroke, used in the double sense of slaughter in battle (cf. i S.
4'' 2 S. 179 18') and plague, since the King's people and family were to
suffer from the first (vv. '^f.) but the King himself from the second, a
loathsome disease. — 15. 0"Sn] intensive pi., Ges. § 124^. — non] some
Mss., (&, B, o>;?i.
16 f . The raid into Judah.— No inkling of this raid with its dis-
astrous consequences is given in Kings, and while it may have some
historical foundation in a raid of nomads into southern Judah
XXI. 1-20.] REIGN OF JEHORAM 417
(Bn.), yet as described with its disastrous consequences it probably
never took place (yet accepted throughout by Pa. EHSP. p. 214).
The narrative, however, does not necessarily imply a sack of Jeru-
salem, as has often been supposed (Be.), but quite otherwise {v. i.).
The history of the city was too well known for the writer to have
presumed upon such a fiction. — 16. Spirit]. Cf. i Ch. 528. — The
Philistines and the Arabians]. Cf. 17", where these very people
are mentioned as giving tribute to Jehoshaphat. — Which are beside
the Cushites]. Cf. 14^ ''> i Ch. i'. The geographic knowledge of
the ancients of Ethiopia and southern Arabia was very indefinite.
Herodotus considered all the land east of the Nile Arabia (II. 8, 12,
15, 19), which could thus be described as beside the Cushites. — 17.
And they came up into Jiidah and broke through into it] that is,
they made a raid into the land. — And they took as plunder every
possession which was found belonging to the royal house and his
sons and his wives]. This language most naturally, taken by itself,
suggests that the royal palace at Jerusalem was plundered, but it
need not imply anything more than the taking of royal stuff wliich,
with children and wives, might have been in camp (so essentially
Ke., Zoe., Ba.). This also seems to have been the view taken by
the Chronicler in 22' (q. v.), if ^ there is followed. — And there was
not left, etc.]. This statement taken with y.% where Jehoram
slew all his brothers, is difficult to reconcile with 2 K. lo'^'-,
where brethren of Ahaziah (Jehoahaz) king ofJudah to the number
of forty-two are mentioned. Whence came these latter if the royal
house of David had been so thoroughly exterminated (We. Prol.
p. 210)? The two narratives are really irreconcilable. — Jehoa-
haz] elsewhere Ahaziah (22')- The two names are compounds
of Yahweh and the verb to seize, but written in the reverse order.
16. nn] wanting in (&. — 17. nippa^] break through or into, cf. i Ch.
ii'2 2 S. 23'6 and Hiph. Is. y^.— v::'ji] (g Kal rds Ovyar^pas avroO, but
cf. V. '<. — inNin>] one MS., (S, S>, (5, innnx.
18-20. The end of Jehoram, — 18 f . In his bowels with an in-
curable disease, etc.]. The writer probably thought of some vio-
lent and incurable chronic diarrhoea. (For a detailed description
of the malady, see Ke., Zoe.).— 19. And it came to pass after a pro-
27
4i8 2 CHRONICLES
longed time and at the time when the end [of his life] came^ during
two days his bowels were going out by reason of his sickness and he
died] {v. i.). — Made no burning for him] i.e., of spices, cf. i6'^
The King was treated with less respect than his fathers. — 20.
Cf. V. K The Chronicler is quoting here from 2 K. 8" and then
from 2 K. 8=^ — Without being desired] i.e., without being lamented
(v. i.). — But not in the sepulchre of the kings] an addition of the
Chronicler to enhance the vileness of Jehoram.
18. . . . px'^] cf. i4'2 I Ch. 22<. — 19. D'S^D D'O''?] B cumqiie diei
succederet dies. The phrase occurs only here and means after a pro-
longed time, cf. C'^Di hy o^c v. '5, also ai3T cniS Dn. S^*, expressed
more briefly by D'S^D Ju. ii« 148 151. — 'O -iNS^ D\rf D''a'''? \pr\ rxs ry^i]
a difficult passage, since the preceding D'S"'J5 o^C"'? implies a longer
time than two days. To remove this contradiction, B, &, and most
commentators have translated two years (so EVs.). (& rendered Kal wj
TjXdev Katpbs tQp ijfj.epCji' 7]iJ.ipas dvo. On Be.'s at (he end of two times
see Ke. More recently Bn. has suggested that (& may be right, and
that tradition told of a sudden death after two days' illness. The
Midrash made a long illness out of this, and the confusion arose from
a gloss, 2''^:^' cc'? vp^, by a better-informed reader. But <S doubtless
read M. It is better to consider X?^ r'<s r>'3i as a phrase describing the
approaching end of life as a consequence of the disease, DT.i' C"""' an
accusative of duration of time introduced by 7 as the sign of the ace;
and iv'<j>"', pointed ins.''., an impf. of continued action (Ges. § loyi);
translating and at the time when the end came, his bowels were going out
during two days. Ke.'s explanation is similar, " about two days
(before the issue of the end of the disease) then the bowels went out."
— r'rn d;'] at the time of Iiis sickness, but perhaps v'^ns should be read
(BDB. 2-; 1. g). — 20, n-irn n'^j iSm] an addition by the Chronicler,
cf. 2 K. 8"- ^^. Luther, following H ambulavitque nan recte, rendered
er wandelte das nicht fein war {i.e., he lived undesirably) and so Oe.
Others render and he departed, mourned by }ione or without being desired,
Ke., Zoe., Kau., Ki., EVs.
XXII. The reign of Ahaziah and the usurpation of Athaliah
(c. 843-836 B.C.). — The brief reign of Ahaziah (843-842) was
marked by the continuance of the alliance between the N. and S.
kingdoms, which involved Ahaziah in the revolution of Jehu and
led to his untimely end. The Chronicler has used all the material
of 2 K. concerning this reign and the usurpation of Athaliah, with
XXn. 1-12.] AHAZIAH AND ATHALIAH 419
the exception of the narratives of the death of Ahaziah and the
massacre of the princes of Judah. In giving the account of these
(w. ^-») he has followed, without a clearly discernible motive,
another source {v. i.).
Ki., in the main, after Bn., assigns v. 1 to M and holds that vv. 3-^*
are M's recension of 2 K., and likewise vv. ' ^ are from M. While the
Chronicler doubtless drew the variant information of vv.'- ''-' {v. i.)
from a Midrashic source, the narrative yet bears the marks-of his composi-
tion, especially in v. "^ in the use of nini cit (1. 23), n^^S |^ni (1. 129),
and m -\TJ (1. 92).
1-6. Ahaziah's character and brief career. — Taken, after a
composite introductory verse, from 2 K. S^^--^ — 1. And the inhab-
itants of Jerusalem] decide, according to the Chronicler, who shall
be king, probably in view of the disasters which the Chronicler holds
to have befallen the royal house. Cf. the enthronement of Jehoa-
haz the son of Josiah by the people after the disaster at Megiddo,
2 K. 233°. Such unusual action would imply that the succession
was disputed. — Ahaziah the youngest son]. Cf. 2V. — For all the
eldest, the hand who came with the Arabians to the camp slew].
This describes the fate of the royal princes who seemingly were
slain while in the field in camp by a marauding band at the time
of the Philistine and Arabian invasion (21'" ' ). (^, however, read
differently, making the word camp a tribal or geographical name
of the Arabians (v. i.). — 2. Forty-two years] i K. 8^^ twenty-two.
This latter number is much nearer correct, since according to 21''''
(2 K. 8'") Jehoram the father was only forty years old at the time
of his death. ® has here twenty. — The daughter of'Omri]. 'Omri
was the father of Ahab, the founder of the dynasty, i K. i6'««'-.
Daughter is here used with the meaning of granddaughter, since
Athaliah was unquestionably the daughter of Ahab {cf. 18' 211=). — 3.
For his mother was his counsellor to do wickedly] an addition to the
text of 2 K. 8". — 4 f. For they were his counsellors after the death
of his father to his destruction. He walked also after their counsel]
also an addition to 2 K. 8"'-. The Chronicler thus emphasises
the evil influence of the association of the house of David with that
of Ahab. — And he went with Jehoram, etc. ]. The alliance between
the N. and S. kingdoms thus continued {cf. 18'), and the war also
420 1 CHRONICLES
with the Syrians, in which Israel seems to have gained a certain
advantage, since Ramoth-gilcad {cj. iS^), aUhough still the centre
of military operations, was at this time in the possession of Israel
{cJ .2 K. 9'*). — Hazael] the former general of Een-hadad King
of Syria {cf. i6=), and now by usurpation, if not also assassina-
tion, his successor {cf. 2 K. S'-'^). — And the Syrians]. Another
reading is archers {v. i.). — Wotmded Joram]. The two names
Jehoram (v. ^) and Joram are the same, simply spelled in a shorter
or longer form (v. i.). — 6. And he returned to be healed in Jezreel
oj^ the wounds with which he had been smitten (lit. which they had
smitten him)]. Thus this sentence is to be read after 2 K. d>-'>. —
Jezreel] mod. Zcrin at the east end of the plain of Esdraelon,
about midway between Megiddo and Bethshean. It is located
on an abrupt hill, terminating the range of Gilboa, some two
hundred feet above the plain, of which it commands a fine view.
Jezre el was a city of residence for the royal family of the N. king-
dom. Ahab had a palace there (i K. 21'). — Ramah] i.e., Ramoth-
gilead. — And Ahaziah* . . . went down]. The expression went
down seems to imply that the visit was made from Jerusalem ((/.
2 K. 9'6), although some think that he went down from Ramoth-
gilead.
1. njnsS DOi;'^ a^n] is corrupt. (& iir avTOvi ol 'Apa^es oi
'AXeifia^oveis gives no aid, except by suggesting that aniS>" may have
fallen from the text after san.— 2. av-^^'i d>;'3-\n] (&^^ 20, <B\ S>, 2 K.
8=6 22 which was probably original here {v. s.). — nn;"] <&^ Axo-o-^ is
doubtless a correction, cf. 2 K. — 3. iSn Nin bj] 2 K. 8=7 i'^m. — 5. divt]
2 K. 828 a-iv cf. 21'. — ':'N-iri i*^::] wanting in (& and 2 K., possibly a
gloss (Bn.). — ':'>•] 2 K. cy. — '^xin] also written '^Nnrn, cf. v. ^. Both
forms occur in 2 K. — m:;nn] (S^ 'Pa/ua, l 'Fafxad point to nc"^? as the
original vocalisation, see St. SBOT. on i K. 22^. — O'Din] a few mss.,
B, (3, and 2 K. D'-din, and so Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau., Ki. Koni., EVs. —
6. 2Z'-'\\ 05 + 'Iwpd/x, 2 K. 829 + -|i^:;n mv.— ^d] about twelve mss., 05,
g*, 2 K. ]2 which read with Be., Ke., Oe., Kau., et a/.^in;n] 2 K. inr^_
the former is more natural, but the latter allowable, cf. Dr. TH. § 27 (7),
also St. SBOT. — 2 K. adds the subject a'ciN, which is supported by (S.
— innryi] a copyist's error for inirnx;, which is found in fifteen mss.,
Vrss., and 2 K.
7-9. The death of Ahaziah. — This differs from the account
given in 2 K. in the following particulars. There the death of the
XXn. 1-12.] AHAZIAH AND ATHALIAH 421
princes is placed subsequent to Jehu's attack upon Ahaziah (2 K.
10' 3 ' ), while the Chronicler or his source places their death ap-
parently first. Ahaziah also, according to 2 K., rides forth with
Joram and meets Jehu, and witnessing the death of Joram flees and
is pursued by Jehu and wounded in his chariot near Ibleam by one
of Jehu's men, but he reaches Megiddo and dies there. Then his
servants carry him to Jerusalem (2 K. 9" '■). Here, on the other
hand, Ahaziah is represented as caught while hiding in Samaria
and slain, having been brought forth to Jehu. This narrative is
irreconcilable with the other and probably comes from some nar-
rator who, thinking of the close association between Ahaziah and
the house of Ahab, and its evil consequences, imagined that he
sought refuge in Samaria and was from thence dragged forth and
slain. — 7. And from God was the destruction of Ahaziah so that
he came to Joram] i.e., it was divinely purposed that Ahaziah should
go to Joram to his destruction. — And when he came he went out
with Joram unto Jelui]. The two kings, according to 2 K. 9"',
rode out together, each in his own chariot, to meet Jehu. — Whom
Yahweh had anointed to cut off the house of Ahab]. According to
I K. 19", Yahweh commanded Elijah to anoint Jehu king over
Israel. This was carried out by one of the sons of the prophets
commissioned by Ehsha (2 K. 9'-^), and the act was done further-
more, according to the compiler of Kings, with the direct purpose
that the house of Ahab might be destroyed (2 K. 9^-'"). — 8. And
the sons of the brethren^ (^ omits sons and preserves probably the
true reading (7;. i.). If sons is correct, then these victims were
little lads, since their grandfather Joram was only forty years old
on his death in the previous year. The phrase ministering also
means, properly, serving as state officials or officers of the army
(y. i.), and it seems probable that these victims were so intended,
and that we have here a tradition of the death of brothers or kins-
men of Ahaziah quite different from that of 2 K. lo'^ f-, where forty-
two of them were slain by the command of Jehu, on their way to
visit their cousins of the house of Ahab. The latter also, as already
noted, met their death a day or two after the death of Ahaziah,
while these are slain apparently before that event. — 9. And he
sought Ahaziah and they took him — now he had hidden himself in
42 2 2 CHRONICLES
Samaria — and they brought him to Jehu and put him to death] a
totally different representation of the death of Ahaziah from that
given in 2 K. 9" {v. s.).—And they buried him] apparently in
contrast to leaving his body unburied, as was usual with a person
who met a violent death at a king's command. According to 2 Iv.
9=8 his servants carried his body from Megiddo, where he died from
the effect of his wound, in a chariot to Jerusalem, "and buried him
in his sepulchre with his fathers in the city of David." But the
Chronicler seemingly could not bring himself to record so honour-
able a fate for a king so reprobate and such an object of divine
judgment; and the burial granted him the Chronicler allowed
given only for the sake of his pious grandfather : /or they said
he is the son of Jehoshaphat who sought Yahweh with his whole
heart. — And the house of Ahaziah had no strength to hold the king-
dom] hence it passed into the control of Athaliah.
7. PDnn f] from D13 tread doum, trample. — Ni^S] V with infinitive
pointing to positive consequence, Koe. iii. § 4060. — nsi 1x331] a late
idiom, Dr. TH. p. 157 n. — nv'' Sn] more clearly in 2 K. 9=' '•> HNipS.
— 8. OiJt'nD] some MSS. '^3. Niph. expresses reciprocal action, cf.
BDB. ODt:' Niph., Ges. § 51J.— ^J3] vi'anting in (& and 2 K. lo'^ where it
was the brethren of Ahaziah who were slain. This was likely original here
and a glossator inserted ■'J3, since Ahaziah's brethren had already been
slain according to the Chronicler's account, v. •. — DTns'D] denotes
royal officers, cf. 178 1 Ch. 27' 281 Est. 1'° Pr. 29'=, BDB. — 9. N3nra Nim]
(& laTpevbfievov = N?"^np. — in.nirii] read sg. -inn — with (S, U, ^, so
Oe., Ki. — '"^^ ■ ■ pxi] inf. with J'N, an unusual construction, Dr.
TH. § 202 (I.), Ges. § 114/. (1. 129).
10-12. The usurpation of Athaliah. — Taken from 2 K. 11''
with slight variations. The usual formulas introducing and closing
a reign are omitted in the case of Athaliah, because she had unlaw-
fully seized the government. — 10. All the royal seed] i.e., all the
male seed, not necessarily limited to the children of Ahaziah. — 11.
Daughter of the king] i.e., a daughter of King Jehoram, but proba-
bly by another wife than Athaliah (so Jos. Ant. ix. 7, i). — In the
bed chamber] presumably that of the royal palace, from which
Joash was transferred to the Temple (v. '=). — The wife of Jehoiada
the priest] wanting in Kings and probably a mere surmise on the
part of the Chronicler due to the fact that the infant prince en-
XXm.-XXIV.] REIGN OF JO ASH 423
joyed the protection of Jehoiada and was placed by him on the
throne; yet a negative cannot be proved. Ew. held that the state-
ment was certainly genuinely historical {Hist. IV. p. 135). (Per-
haps also GAS. /. II. p. 100.)
10. npN-i] 2 K. II' nnxii. Ch. preserves the original text. — nsipi]
2 K. -i3Nni is supported here by some MSS. and Vrss. and should be
followed, so Be., Oe., Kau., et al. — rnini n^a"^] added by the Chron-
icler.— 11. n>'3->;'in'>] 2 K. ii^ jraunn- and so (S^l (lojaa^ee), and since
n could have crept in through the influence of the following rj, the
reading of 2 K. is regarded as original by Ki., Gray, HPN. p. 255,
Cheyne in EBi. art. Jehosheba. But (S* luxya^ed may be original (&
(cp. the uncials 6 and ©) and H supports M, hence the text, though
uncertain, had better be allowed to stand. — "j'^cn na] wanting in (S",
which text, however, is not likely original 05, cf. ^^, &. 2 K. adds Div
mnnx mns", but Ch. has nti 13 ]nDn yTiin> nifN onini iScn na nj)3i:'ini
innnN rons' nnin later in the verse, hence it has been conjectured that
the closer description of Jehoshabeath fell out (the words 'en n2 re-
maining), and was later added on the margin, whence it crept into the
text after the second Jehoshabeath (Bn.). The possibility remains that
the Chronicler himself in copying from 2 K. accidentally omitted the
words after l^D and subsequently inserted them where they now stand.
— D'nmrn] 2 K. Kt. D'nniDcn, Ch. preserves the original reading, cf.
St. SBOT. — inni] was added by the Chronicler apparently to make
inpj^D PNi inx clearer. The latter seems to be a gloss in 2 K., St.
SBOT. — im-'noni] 2 K. mx nno^i. Ch. again preserves the better
text, St. 5BOr.— mnn'-nn] 2 K. nmn.— 12. onx] 2 K. ii^ r\T\n. —
D'hSkh ni3] 2 K. nini '3.
XXIII-XXIV. The reign of Joash {c. 836-796 b.c.).— In the
main a simple reproduction, with marked revision and amplifica-
tion in places, of 2 K. 11^-122'. Nowhere else does the Chronicler's
method of interpreting history and introducing notions of his own
time as controlling factors in the earlier history more clearly appear.
(These chapters are allowed to be his composition by Ki., but only
c. 23 by Bn., who holds c. 24 in the main from the Chronicler's
source.) The outline of the narrative is as follows: The youthful
prince Joash, who had been hidden six years, is crowned and
received as king, while the old queen-mother Athaliah is slain. A
covenant is made by the people to serve Yahweh. The temple of
Baal is destroyed and his priest slain (c. 23). Then comes an
424 2 CHRONICLES
account of the activity of Joash, who repairs the Temple and
serves Yahweh during the life of Jehoiada the priest, who had
I)laced him upon the throne. But after the priest's death he yields
to the princes of Judah and cultivates the worship of Baal. For
this he is denounced by the prophet Zechariah, who at the com-
mand of the King is stoned. The religious defection and murder
of the prophet are not mentioned in 2 K. and may be a surmise of
the Chronicler or one of his school, because some sin was thought
necessary to explain the disasters which, related next, befell Joash
through Hazael King of Syria. After these events his servants
conspired against him and slew him.
XXIII. 1-11. The coronation of Joash. — Based upon 2 K. 1 1' '=,
but completely rewritten, with the following points of agreement
and difference. Both narratives agree in the fact that Jehoiada
conspired, at first, with the centurions (v.- 2 K. 11*). But accord-
ing to 2 K., these centurions were oflQcers of the Carites and run-
ners, i.e., the royal foreign body-guard elsewhere called Cherethites
and Pelethites (2 S. S'^ 1518 20'), who took a prominent part in
the enthronement of Solomon (i K. i'^- 44)^ These captains are
brought into the Temple and there, with an oath, the youthful
prince being shown to them, the compact is made. In Chronicles
the Carites and runners, or foreign troops, are not mentioned and
the centurions are clearly Levitical chiefs, whose names are given.
They also act as the intermediaries for a much larger conspiracy.
Through them the Levites and the principal men of Israel are
gathered out of all the cities of Judah and all this congregation
enters into a covenant, and unto this multitude it is declared that
the King's son shall reign. According to 2 K., the youthful prince
is crowned and hailed first as king in the midst of the foreign
troops, who have been arranged for his protection and stand guard
within and without the Temple. According to Chronicles, the
companies, who have been arranged and stand guard, are Levites
and companies of the people, and only priests and Levites are
admitted within the Temple and special care is taken that
no others enter the sanctuary. The narrative of 2 K. is prob-
ably an accurate account of the event. The coronation of the
young prince was a bold coup d'etat undertaken by the priest
XXm. 1-21.] CORONATION OF JOASH 425
with the assistance of the foreign body-guard. Solomon was
made king in a somewhat similar manner. A conspiracy such
as is described in Chronicles formed with leaders throughout
all Judah, who assemble at Jerusalem, could hardly have
escaped the notice of Athaliah or met with no counter move-
ment on her part ; but according to both narratives, she was com-
pletely surprised. The motive of the Chronicler's reconstruction
of the narrative is clear. In view of the stringency with which the
Temple in his time was guarded from profanation by foreigners, he
could not conceive that the high priest could have called upon the
royal foreign body-guard for service in the Temple. Hence he
transformed the Carites and runners into Levites, and made the
whole movement an ecclesiastical one. But we have the express
testimony of Ezekiel that foreigners were admitted into the sanctu-
ary (Ez. 44^ '•). Hence there is no reason to doubt that the early
kings did guard the Temple with foreign troops, and from this
historical point of view the revision of the Chronicler was a mis-
taken one. A reconciliation of the two accounts has been sought
on the theory that both accounts mention merely the main points
of the proceedings — the author of 2 K. emphasising the part taken
in the affair by the royal body-guard, the Chronicler on the other
hand emphasising that taken by the Levites; so that both ac-
counts mutually supplement one another and only when taken
together give a complete account of the circumstances (Ke., Mov.,
H-J.). But this is not tenable.
1. Strengthened himself] a favourite phrase of the Chronicler
(ff. I'). 2 K. 11^ has "sent." — 'Azariah the son of Jeroham, etc.]
not in 2 K. The fact that these personal names are given has
been regarded as an evidence of the writer's exact historical infor-
mation (so Ke., Zoe.), but where history was a blank the Chroni-
cler and his school were fond of reconstructing it in detail with such
elements as personal names. (Cf. the lists of names in i Ch. 23-
26.) In 2 K. the centurions are over the Carites and runners
{v. 5.).— 2. This verse is lacking in 2 K. (v. 5.).— 3. And all the
congregation] i.e., through their representatives, made a covenant
with the king in the house of God\ This formal state affair in
Chronicles takes the place of the private compact of Jehoiada with
426 2 CHRONICLES
the captains of the guards mentioned in 2 K. ii<. — As Yahweh
hath spoken concerning the sons of David] wanting in 2 K., a
characteristic touch of the Chronicler to colour the whole transac-
tion as far as possible with religious motives. — 4 f. This is the
thing which you shall do a third part of you that come in on the
Sabbath] taken verbatim from 2 K. ii^-', which continues, "shall
be keepers of the watch of the king's house; (6) and a third part
shall be at the gate Sur and a third part at the gate behind the
guard so shall ye keep the watch of the house and be a barrier (7)
and two companies of you, even all that go forth on the Sabbath,
shall keep the watch of the house of Yahweh about the king."
This passage is not entirely clear, since the exact routine and dispo-
sition of the Temple and palace guards are unkno\\Ti. The text
also appears not without corruption. The usual explanation of the
passage, regarding v. « as an unintelligible gloss, is that on week-
days one-third of the guard was at the Temple and two-thirds at the
palace, but on the Sabbaths the reverse. Jehoiada now arranges
that the three companies should be concentrated together at the
time of the change of the guards at the Temple and that Athaliah
should have no troops at her disposal at the palace (Ki., Bn., St.
SBOT., Bur., Sk.). According to another and older interpreta-
tion, retaining v. % it was the custom on the Sabbath for two-
thirds of the royal guards to be free and one-third to be on duty at
the palace. This last third Jehoiada orders to be subdivided into
three companies, one to guard the king's house, i.e., the palace; one
the gate Sur, perhaps an entrance to the palace; and the third the
gate behind the guard, another entrance probably to the palace,
perhaps "the gate of the guards" (2 K. ii'^). Thus communica-
tion with the city would be Cut off and Athaliah held as in a trap by
her o\\Ti guards (a supposition not exactly in keeping with her
subsequent entrance into the Temple, v. " 2 K. 1 1'^, 3^et v. i.). The
two divisions of the guard who are off duty Jehoiada orders to
assemble at the Temple and surroimd the King (Be., Oe., Ba.).
How far the Chronicler understood the original arrangement is
uncertain. He was concerned in substituting the priests and the
Levites for the foreign guard, and since he retained the text of 2 K.
as far as possible, consistency is not to be sought in his account.
XXm. 1-21.] CORONATION OF JOASH 427
Under those that come in on the Sabbath he understood the priestly
and Levitical courses of that day. Of these he made three divi-
sions, one gatemen at the thresholds, i.e., the entrances presumably
of the Temple; one at the house of the king; and one at the gate of
the foundation (TlD''), — 2 K. at the gate Sur ("1ID). Both read-
ings are unintelligible. Probably the original in Kings was at the
horse gate (DID) {cf. v. '5). The reasons of the appointment at
these three stations are not clear, unless we interpret after the fol-
lowing verse, to protect the sanctity of the Temple, but why then
should one station be at the house of the king ? The probability is
that the Chronicler neither understood nor cared about the details
of the arrangements. — And all the people shall be in the courts of
the house of Yahu'eh] wanting in 2 K. But according to the
Chronicler's narrative (w. ="■), the conspiracy was sufficiently
widespread to cause a crowd of the adhering people to be present.
The Chronicler also may have thought of the usual gathering in
his day at the Temple on the Sabbath. — 6. But let none . . . for
they are holy] wanting in 2 K. On the last clause cf 35^ — And
all the people shall observe the injunction of Yahweh] i.e., shall not
enter the sacred precincts of the Temple. In 2 K. 11' the words
shall observe the injunction appear with a different meaning in the
command that the guards shall keep the watch of the house of
Yahweh about the king, i.e., shall be on guard at the Temple, where
the King was. — 7. The Levites] an addition of the Chronicler.
In 2 K. 11^ this command is given to the royal guards. — Into the
house] 2 K. within the ranks. The representations are quite
different. According to the Chronicler any one who should at-
tempt to enter the sacred precincts of the Temple is to be slain,
according to the narrator of 2 K. any one who should attempt
to pass the ranks of the guards who were encircling Joash should
be slain. The object of the former command is to preserve the
sanctity of the Temple. The object of the latter is to protect the
prince from any possible violence. — And be ye with the king when
he comes in and when he goes out] i.e., on all occasions. In 2 K.
the last clauses are reversed, " when he goes out and when he
comes in," i.e., when he left the Temple and entered the palace
{cf v. »").
428 2 CHRONICLES
8. The Levites and all Jtidah] 2 K. ii«, "the captains over
hundreds." — Those that were to come in on the Sabbath and those
that were to go out]. Thus the whole guard, and not two-thirds,
was assembled at the Temple. — For Jehoiada the priest dismissed
not the courses] i.e., he retained in the Temple both the priests and
Levites who were coming in to serve and those who had finished
their turn of service. 2 K. has "and they [i.e., the guards just
mentioned] came to Jehoiada the priest." — 9. And Jehoiada the
priest delivered, etc.]. This statement, while perfectly natural in
Chronicles, since the priests and Levites would not be thought of
as ordinarily armed, yet appears out of place in 2 K. iii°, since the
royal guards would naturally have their own weapons; so that it
is felt to be a gloss there, taken from Chronicles (Ki., Bn., St.
SBOT., Bur., Sk.). Ewald thought that the weapons were David's
own spear and shield which had been preserved in the Temple and
played some part at every coronation ceremony {Hist. IV. p. 136).
But this is an improbable fancy. — 10. And he set all the people]
2 K. II", "and the guard stood." — From the right (south) corner
of the temple unto the left (north) corner of the temple by the altar
and by the temple round about the king]. The guards extended
from one comer of the Temple to the other, enclosing thus within a
semicircle the altar and the front of the Temple. The last phrase,
round about the king, seems out of place, since the King had not
yet been brought out, unless it is used by anticipation. The troops
have been regarded as placed in a circle half facing east and half
west, thus encircling the King (Be.) (but v. i.). — 11. The testimony]
(so also 2 K. ii'=) i.e., the law-book which was laid upon him or
given him with the symbolical meaning that he should rule accord-
ing to its precepts (Be., Ba., H-J.). But there is no evidence of
such a custom and the context and the construction demand some
emblem of royalty (Oe.), hence testimony (mij?) in 2 K. is
probably a corruption of bracelets (nnj?^), which were an in-
signia of royalty {cf 2 S. i'") (Bn., Ki., Bur., Sk., St. SBOT. after
We. Comp. p. 361). The corruption probably antedates the
Chronicler, and testimony should be read in his text. — And
Jehoiada and his sofis]. In 2 K. ii''^ the subject of anointed is
indefinite. The Chronicler thought of this act as a priestly func-
YYTTT 1-21.] CORONATION OF JOASH 429
tion. — And they said] 2 K., "and they clapped their hands and
said."
1. prnrn] {v. i') 2 K. 11* rhz'. The latter was inappropriate to the
Chronicler because the Levitical centurions (v. s.) would be closely
associated with Jehoiada the priest. — 'ui p n>-\t>;'?] wanting in 2 K.
S appositive, Dav. Synt. § 73 R. 7, Koe. iii. § 289k.— ani'J (6 Iwpan,
cf. I Ch. 27". — •'-131] ^BA Zaxapia = nn^r; l Zexpt. — nnja] <&^'^ eU
olKov, A + kU, I- conflates. ^ (supported by ^) preserves original (&,
but probably nn^i is the original IS^ reading, yet cf. 2 K. 11^. —
3. ^7\pry '?D] (& + lov8a; wanting in 2 K. ii^ — D^n'^xn] 2 K. rin\ —
iScn oy] (S^A 4- ^ai edei^ev avrois (^ /cai exP'"""") ■'■^'' *''^'' ■'■°''
/SaffiX^ws, a scribal addition from 2 K. — 3^ is wanting in 2 K. —
4. '1JI D-'jns'?] an addition by the Chronicler. — a^sDn ny*:''?] cf. i
Ch. 9". — 5. n''t:'''Sa'm]. The Chronicler having assigned a new duty
to the first third of 2 K. gives the duty of the first company to the
second by this insertion. — I'^cn r-^^] 2 K. iis I'^cn n^a mctJ'D •'•^r:•^'^.
— 11DM nj-Lto] K a(i portani quce appellatiir Fundamenti. (5 jv ttJ iri^Xij
.tJ iU^o-Tj = ]i3"'n(n) 'r read a corruption of M. §» ] m n ^; J^ii^s
(coquorum) = Heb. Dinri? which in plural has the sense of body-guard
(= o^in) and so also the Aram, word cf. Dn. 2"; hence the reading
of ^ is merely a correction from 2 K. 2 K. ii« iiD 'ti-a was probably
originally' '-iD {cf. v. ^^ with 2 Ch. 23'^, so Oe., Ba.) of which iiD^n is a
corruption. — 'ui Ssi] wanting in 2 K. — 6. Wanting in 2 K. — ax ••d] as
adversative conjunction, only, Koe. iii. § 3721. — a^jn^n] (g + /cai oi
AevetTat. — 7. dmSh idv^^i] 2 K. iisanDpm addressed to thennTi v-ic' v. '.
— n^^n Sn] 2 K. nmcn Sn.— rni] nine mss., (S, 21, H, vni.— inxsai IN33]
order reversed in 2 K.— 8. min^ "^^i cm"-,-!] 2 K. ii^ nvNcn ntr.—
'iJi n"? id] an addition by the Chronicler taking the place of Sn in^^i
]non j?Tiini of 2 K. — lac] set free from duty, c/. i Ch. 9^3 Qr. — 9. v^^■>^n^<
niNDH nirS pjn] wanting in (S^a. — ain^jnn] 2 K. n>jnn, but Vrss. d\'} — .
Ch. probably original, so Th., Klo., Bn., et al.—r^wr:r^ hni] wanting
in 2 K. — D^ta'^trn] either a general term armour (Ba. on i Ch. 18'
and Expos. T., Oct. 1898, p. 43/.), or shields (EVs.) as seems de-
manded by Ct. 4S see Bur. on 2 K. iii".— 10, Bjjn ^12 rs idjm] 2 K. 11"
csin nc3;M. — inStt*] a late word which the Chronicler has used instead
of 2 K. rSoi, cf 325 Ne. 4'i- " Jb. 33'8 361= Jo. 2^.— noSi narc'-] EVs.
a/oH^ by the altar and the house{ tetnple), but S in the sense along by is a
doubtful usage. Klo. (2 K.) interpreting the passage as it stands, thinks
cf two lines of men, one facing the altar and the other the house, and
each forming a semicircle, T20. Kau. renders bis zum altar und [wieder]
bis zum Tempel hin and considers the following words a gloss (in 2 K.),
since the King does not appear until v. «, so also St. SBOT. Bur.
(2 K.) following a hint in & reconstructs n^aSi natcS 3^30, round about
430 2 CHRONICLES
the altar and the temple and regards n^cn Sj? a gloss inserted to explain
2-30 after that word had been wrongly placed. The Chronicler copied
the phrase from 2 K. without regard to its exact meaning. — 11.
i:nM . . . iN''Svi] QJ 2 K. ii'^ jn-'i . . . nxim. The latter seems to have
been original here, yet the Chronicler may have thought of Jehoiada and
his sons as the actors. Either (S or l§ has sulTered intentional alterations
and has been made to agree in number with the preceding or with the
following verbs, respectively. — innK'CM . . . id^'^sm] so also 2 K. where
C5 shows the sg. probably original, so St. SBOT.
12-15. The death of Athaliah. — Taken from 2 K. 11 '^-'s^ with
slight changes and additions in ^-x. "^ '■ (v. i.). — 12. Of the people
running]. In 2 K. ii'^ the word running (D'^i'lH) refers to the
"guard" mentioned in v. « 2 K. 11^ ^ " (cf. 12'"). — And praising
the king] wanting in 2 K. — 13. By his pillar at the entrance] i.e.,
at the King's customary place, which the Chronicler probably
thought of at the entrance from the outer or people's court into the
inner or priests' court. In 2 K. ii'< the expression is " by the pillar
according to his custom," and the writer may have meant by the
side of one of the two great pillars of the porch called Jachin and
Boaz {cf. 3'^). — And the trumpets] i.e., the trumpeters. — And the
singers with musical instruments also leading the singing of praise]
wanting in 2 K., a characteristic addition of the Chronicler. — 14.
And Jehoiada the priest commanded, or possibly, And Jehoiada the
priest went out unto the captains] (v. i.).—15. And they laid
hands on her] (Kau., Ki., Sk.) better than, And they made way
for her, the rendering of ancient Vrss. (except B), Be., RV. — Horse
gate] lit. gate of horses, an entrance into the palace {cf. v. =).
The connection of this gate, if any, with the horse gate of the city
wall, which seems to have been near the palace, is not clear {cf.
Ne. 3=' Je. 31'°).
12. n'Xin D>'n] 2 K. iiisdj.'.- t'snn, where |''X-in (on Aram, form, see
Ges. § 876), used in the sense of guard, is a gloss, so Bn., Ki., Bur., St.
The Chronicler understood it as a participle modifying Oi'n, so (8 of 2 K.,
hence transposed. — 1^":^ rx a^'^Snsni] wanting in 2 K. — oj?n Sn] (& incor-
rectly irp6s rbv ^acrCKia. — no] = ni22. — 13. N13C3 TnrjJ] 2 K. 11'*
t3D!:'D3 Ticyn. — ditj'hi] a few MSS. Dnirni, and so (5 (<^5o2) in 2 K. —
SJ72] 2 K. incorrectly Sn. — SSnS DViici "c^'n -tSDa oi-\T.;'cni] wanting
in 2 K. — 14. Nxn] read after 2 K. ii'^ ixm, so Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.,
XXm. 1-21.] CORONATION OF JOASH 43 1
et al. — ^'^'ipci] read with (&, H, and the corrected text of 2 K. nii^o, so
Kau., Ki. — nma'.-i n''3D Sn] so also in 2 K. nma'n occurs also in 2 K. 1 1 *
with the meaning ranks, and as a technical term of building with unknown
meaning in i K. 6', see BDB. p. 690. In 2 K. the word may be a
corruption for nnxnS and n^2a a consequent substitution for yinc, cf.
Haupt on 2 K. 11", SBOT. Kau. regards the phrase as a meaningless
gloss in 2 K. which was either taken over by the Chronicler or later
interpolated into his work. — nci''] 2 K. ncn. — niniDP n*^] 2 K.
npin ha. — 15. i^ir Nnn Sn] 2 K. ii'* «i3d iii. — hiiT'Dm] 2 K. ncim.
16-21. The covenant, the destruction of the temple of Baal,
and the enthronement of the King. — Taken from 2 K. ii'^-so
with a few minor changes, except w\ '^ t-^ which, with exception of
the first clause, are additions by the Chronicler. This section shows
very clearly that the movement to supplant Athaliah by Joash was
religious as well as political, and like the revolution of Jehu, against
Baal-worship, probably Tyrian, and introduced through the influ-
ence of the northern alliance, by Joram, and continued under Atha-
liah to the neglect of the worship of Yahweh. — 16. And Jehoiada
made a covenant between himself and between all the people and be-
tween the king to be the people of Yahweh] i. e., Jehoiada, the people,
and the King obligated themselves to recognise Yahweh as their
God. 2 K. 1 1 "f read "between Yahweh" in place of between himself.
The Chronicler omitted the first as superfluous and introduced the
second to give Jehoiada greater prominence. — 17. And all the
people, etc.]. This violence against the house and priest of Baal
shows that Jehoiada's movement was religious as well as political
(v. s.). — Mattofi] is probably a contraction of Mattan Baal (gift of
Baal, a name common in Phoenician), appearing in Ahithnmballes,
a name in Plautus (Poen. V. 2, 35) (COT. p. 88).— 18. And
Jehoiada appointed overseers of the house of Yahweh] so far, 2
K. IT'S, implying the restoration of the worship of Yahweh in the
place of that of Baal; Under the authority of the priests and the
Levites] with the remainder of the verse an addition of the Chron-
icler, who naturally could conceive of no officers of the Temple
not subject to the priests and Levites, if indeed not from among
them. — Whom David had distributed, etc.]. According to the
Chronicler, David determined the personnel of the servitors in
the Temple {cf. i Ch. 23, 24, 26), while the sacrificial ritual was
432 2 CHRONICLES
according to the law of Moses, i. e., P or the entire Pentateuch (cf.
I Ch. 6" <*'>), but both the personnel and the ritual of the singers he
regarded as established by David (i Ch. 6'' "" 25'='). The prob-
ability, however, is that the Chronicler wrote of the courses and not
the personnel according to the reading of (S (v. i.). — 19. And he set
the gate-keepers, etc.] a continuation of the addition of the Chroni-
cler, who thus held that Jehoiada re-established the complete
Davidic equipment of the Temple — in reality the equipment of the
Chronicler's own time, i.e., priests with attendant Levites and
Levitical singers and gate-keepers (on the last cf. i Ch. 26'-'^). —
That no one unclean in any respect should enter in'\ not simply
persons ceremonially unclean, but also aliens who might be so
designated {cf. Is. 35' 52'). — 20. The nobles and the rulers of the
people] is a substitute for "the Carites and the guard" of 2 K.
II" (cf. V. '). — And they brought the king, etc.] a description of the
removal of the newly cro\\-ned King from the Temple to the palace
and a continuation of the narrative of v. ". — Through the upper
gate] a gate of the Temple, cf. 27'. In 2 K. "by the way of the
gate of the guard," probably a gateway connecting the precincts of
the Temple with those of the palace — hence a gate of both Temple
and palace. The Chronicler, writing when the palace had ceased
to exist, would naturally fix a locality by its connection with the
Temple. The use of the term "guard" also he avoided {v. s.).
The episodes of the entrance and death of Athaliah, of the formation
of the covenant, and of the destruction of the temple of Baal (vv. '-"*
2 K. I i'3's), interrupting the direct narrative in 2 K. of the coronation and
enthronement of Joash, taken- with the double notice of the death of
Athaliah (v. '^ v. =' 2 K. ii'«- ^o), suggest that extracts from two documents
have been placed together in 2 K. 11: vv. '-'^ isb-so representing one
document and vv. '^'S" the other (the view of Stade, ZAW. 1885, pp.
280 ff., SBOT. accepted by Bur., Sk., et al.).
16. iJ-J] 2 K. 11'" nini pa followed by Ki. — 2 K. II•7^ which
probably arose through dittography (Klc, St.), is wanting. — 17. insm]
so also 2 K. ii's, but (S in both places sg., hence St. corrects in 2 K.,
but no weight can be attached to Ci> in such cases. — 2>n Sd] CS, 2 K.
yiN-n aj; Ss, & 'V-ijja-.i? ).:>Qik oil;;^. Te.xt of 2 K. probably origi-
nal here, though C5 may be corrected from v. "K — 'ra rxi] 2 K.'is hn; Ch.
original. — ii^'J-] 2 K. -|- aa^n. — 18. yi^in^j^BA -^ oitpei/s likely a scribal
addition, cf. (S^ V, &, 2 K. only pan. — om'^h] two mss. cited by Ken-
XXIV. 1-27] REIGN OF JOASH 433
nicott, C6, Iff, &, ® aitSni, c/. 5^ where Vrss. also add copulative. Oe.,
Ki. Kom. BH. read 1 with Vrss. i may have been omitted by a
scribe, since the Leviks were not permitted to offer the burnt-offering,
although the Chronicler doubtless intended to convey the meaning that
the priests should offer the burnt-offering while the Levites stood by
■with rejoicing and with singing. See on i Ch. 23". — yT-ini oi-'m
nini n''3 Sy TnpSniB'N D'l^n (i)D''j."i3m>3 nininiampD]. There seems to
be a lacuna between ciSn and nif n, since all priests and not special
ofl&cers (but lit. offices mpa) were permitted to offer the burnt-offering.
p'?n also is not used elsewhere meaning distribute (i Ch. 24^ ^ do not
support it, BDB. pSn Qal 2). (S inserts at this point /cat avitTT-qcre rds
i<py]Heplas rdv i€p4wv Kal rwv KevnCbv = D^Sni D''jn3n nipSna rs "iDP.'J.
This addition removes the difficulty in M, and has the marks of the
Chronicler (note the significance of ^ny''^, the word nipSnD, and the
co-ordinate genitives), hence was a part of the original text and fell
out by homoeoteleuton. The whole passage may be rendered, Jehoiada
placed the offices of the house of Yahweh in the hand of the priests and
the Levites and he appointed the courses of the priests and the Levites,
which David divided, over the house of Yahweh to offer, etc. — nini3]
many MSS., (6, H, ■iin'''^. — imt n'' *?;•] at the hands of David, i.e., accord-
ing to the system of song inaugurated by David. Possibly "iSd has fallen
from text, cf. 29" i^T ''S3 i-f Sy, but Vrss. support M, cf. Ezr. 3'". — •
19 is wanting in 2 K. — laT Sd'^] S of specification, Koe. iii. § 328k. —
20. aya a^Srirn nxi onnxn nxi] 2 K. ii's D^s-^^ rsi "'i^n nssM. — tiviJU,
2 K. pi. — Tina] 2 K. ITi. — iv'^yn ly^:'] on omission of art. before substan-
tive, see Dr. TH. § 209 I., Koe. iii. § 334q-— n^'^i'^] 2 K. □•'Sin.—
^'?D^ r\n ijittTi] 2 K. aiTM. — r\:hTi'C7\l 2 K. doSdh. — 21. anna] 2 K.
ii2o -\- ^'7D(^) n''2.
XXIV. 1-3. An introductory notice of the King's reign.
— Taken from 2 K. 12'-^ (11^1-123), from which the synchronism
with the N. kingdom as usual is omitted (v. * ">), and also, as
incompatible with the new regime under Joash and Jehoiada, the
statement that the high places were not removed and were fre-
quented by the people (v." "'). The Chronicler also adds v. '.
— 2. All the days of Jehoiada]. It is doubtful whether this
limitation is found in 2 K. 12= (z;. i.). — 3. And Jehoiada' took for
him two unves] since he stood in loco parentis. — And he begat sons
and daughters]. The Chronicler magnifies his favourites by giv-
ing them the honour of large families (cf. ii's «■ 132').
1. tt'N''] 2 K. 12' tt'Nin\ — is'^ca] 2K. (12=) -\- CNini ^^n NiniS 3J2B» njC3.
— 2. p^n pTiini "iDi So] 2 K. 12' jn^n yiMn^ imin icx vc Sd, "All his
28
434 2 CHRONICLES
days wherein Jehoiada the priest instructed him" (6, V, Ki., RV.;
"All his days forasmuch as Jehoiada instructed him" Th., Kamp.,
Kau., Bur., Sk.— 3. Wanting in 2 K.
4-14. The repair of the Temple. — Based upon 2 K. 12^ '2,
but completely rewritten. This passage in 2 K. describes the origin
of certain regulations for the repair of the Temple which probably
remained in force to the time of the exile (cf. 2 K. 22). Previous
to the reign of Joash the Temple had been maintained at the expense
of the King; but then the attempt was made by Joash, doubtless
owing to the impoverished condition of the royal exchequer, to
make the Temple self-supporting. He tried first to lay the responsi-
bility upon the priests, and ordered the repairs to be made from
money which they received as dues or free-will offerings from the
people. But Jehoiada and the other priests failed to comply with
this order. Thereupon, having been rebuked, they were freed from
this obligation and also deprived of the privilege of collecting the
money, but all the money brought to the Temple the priests were
allowed to retain, save that brought for guilt-offerings and sin-
offerings, which was ordered placed in a chest and from thence,
under the super\'ision of the King's scribe and the high ( ?) priest,
applied for the repair of the Temple. While the plan provided
money sufficient for the repair of the Temple, not enough accrued
for refurnishing the utensils of the Temple. This narrative in
Kings, reflecting little credit upon the priests, was unthinkable from
the point of view of the Chronicler. It allowed that the King was
superior to the priests, and the real guardian and master of the
Temple. To demand also the dues of the priests, even for such a
worthy and ecclesiastical object, was an infringement of their sacred
rights and privileges. No blame then could attach to Jehoiada and
the others for their passive resistance of this illegal invasion. Hence
the narrative was re\\Titten. The priests and the Levites were
summoned to go among the people and collect money for the repair
of the Temple. They proceeded slowly. So the King, to hasten
matters, placed a collection-box at the Temple and urged the
contribution of the ancient tax levied by Closes in the wilder-
ness; and to this the people and rulers responded most joyfully
and most liberally. A great abundance of money was collected,
I
XXIV. 1-27] REIGN OF JOASH 435
more than enough for the house, and with this balance gold and
silver utensils were made for the Temple. — 4. And it came to
pass afterwards] a mere phrase of transition. — 5. The Levites].
Only priests are mentioned in the narrative of 2 K. — Go out
into the cities of Judah]. In 2 K. nothing is said about collect-
ing money outside of Jerusalem, but the priests are to apply for
the repairs all the money that came into the Temple treasury
both from regular assessments and free-will offerings (2 K. 12^).
^The Lei'ites hastened it not] 2 K. i2« "In the twenty-third
year of king Jehoash the priests had not repaired the breaches
of the house." — 6. The tax of Moses] the half shekel required of
every male for the support of the sanctuary according to Ex. 30" '^
38-' '■ (v. also i.). — 7. For'AtJialiah the wicked one and* her sons,
etc.]. These statements are wanting in 2 K. Since according to
the Chronicler Ahaziah's uncles and brothers had all been slain
(21^ 22'), we have either an example of the Chronicler's complete
disregard of historical consistency, or sons is used figuratively de-
noting adherents (Ba.). The reading "her priests" has been pro-
posed (Oe., Bn.) (v. i.). — Broke into the house of God] probably
in the sense of plundered. — And also all the consecrated furniture of
the house of Yahweh they used for Ba alim] i.e., in the worship of
Baal, cf. Ho. 2'° <«'. — 8. And set it at the gate of the house of
Yahweh on the oiitside]. According to 2 K. i2« the chest was
placed by the altar, but from the Chronicler's point of view laymen
were not permitted within the court where the altar stood, hence
the change of its position in the narrative of the Chronicler to the
outside. — 10. Then all the princes rejoiced and brought [the tax]
and cast [it] into the chest unto the full] i.e., either until all had
given (Be., Kau., BDB. n^^ Pi. d) or until the chest was full ((g, B,
Zoe., Oe., Ki.). The latter is preferable. — 11. And it came to pass
when they brought the chest for the oversight of the king by the hand
of the Levites] i.e., the chest was brought by the Levites for the in-
spection of the King, or more probably for royal inspection through
the Levites, who represented the King (Ke., Oe., Zoe., Ki.). — The
scribe of the king and the inspector of the chief priest]. The latter
officer is apparently an invention of the Chronicler to place the high
priest on the same level with the King; "if the King sends his
436
2 CHRONICLES
scribe the high priest also does not appear personally but causes
himself to be represented by a delegate, cf. 2 K. 12" <'">" (We. Prol.
p. 200). — 12. The doers of the work of the service in the house of
Yahweh] i.e., those having charge of the Temple {cf. 1 Ch. 9'=). —
14. Whereof were made vessels for the house of Yahweh] a direct
contradiction of 2 K. 12", where it is stated that utensils for the
Temple were not made — the contributions evidently not sufficing
for this. The Chronicler's representation forbade such a lack.
4. Wanting in 2 K. — p nn>s "Hm] cf. i Ch. 18'. — c'sr a"? d;; n>n] it
was with the heart of Joash, i.e., it was his intention, cf. i Ch. 22^ On
simple pf. after ^r\'>^ see Koe. iii. § 370b. — 5 . iiC] i?; + ■'1 = out of the
abundance of hence as often as and in combination with ^r^'3 njc =
yearly, cf. i S. 71s Zc. i4'« (see BDB. p. 191b). — D^Sn nn?: n'^i] an
explanation for the delay in making the repairs different from 2 K. 12^
— 6. I'^'on] 05 + 'Iwds which, although agreeing with 2 K. 12^ is proba-
bly a scribal expansion. — 'wTN-in] the c/jiV/ [priest], cf. v." 19" 31'" 2 K.
jnon + a''jnoSi. — nNtt-D] root n'si'J carry, lift, hence burden, portion, only
here and v. 'of sacred contribution, tax (BDB.), cf. offering to Yahweh
Ez. 20<<'. — " nay] (& avdpibirov (toO) deoxi, cf. v. ^. — •SNnti'i'? Sni-rni] (g Sre
i^eK\r]<Tla<re rbv lap. leads Bn. to read '"> Vnp, but (& doubtless read
our 1^ as Hiph. pf. Koe. regards Snpni as a second nomen rectum
after nNsyD (iii. § 376b) and SnTiT'''? as in apposition with the preceding
noun {ib. § 28of). The latter is more simply explained as a gen., so
Zoe., Oe., Kau., EVs.— 7. nyiincn f] wickedness, godlessness, i.e.,
Athaliah the (embodied) godlessness. — n^ja] (6, 13, 3 + 1 considered
unnecessary by Be., Oe., but added by Kau., Bn., Ki. ^^\}p is a
suggestion of Oe. and Bn. — 8. idnm] and he commanded, the command
itself being omitted for conciseness as often after icn, cf. Jo. 2" Ps.
10531. 34 jb. 97, Koe. iii. § 369k. — ins ins] as in 2 K. 12'" piN not in
cstr , as Ew. § 286 d, but a form like ilDn . piN appears only with the
article (Ges. § 350), so St. SBOT. on 2 K. 12'", see Koe. iii. § 3iod. —
— 9. Si-] proclamation, cf. 30^ 36" Ezr. i' lo' Ne. S'". — nxii'D] d KaOihs
elirev = 1DN it'SD, cf i Ch. 1516. — 10. inDm] (gsA ^SuKav. — nhjh nj7]
cf. 31', to be classed with other cases of inf. abs. after prep. Koe. iii.
§ 225b. S nj? = earlier ny, cf. 2 K. 13"- 'S Ew. § 315 c (3). — 11. nj?2]
at the time when, cstr. before a relative sentence, cf. Ps. 4* Jb. 6",
Ew. § 332 d. — NU"'] freq. impf., Dr. TH. § 30, Koe. iii. § 157b. —
:i>^^n -10 I'^nn mpe Sn jnsn ns nij^ nj?3] wanting in 2 K. 12". — '^'•pD]
wanting in 2 K. — 'i>i<-\n ps] 2 K. Snjn ]r\2r>. — nyi] lay bare, by remov-
ing contents, so empty. \ with the imperfect for older nj.'^i, Ew.
§ 343 c. — 'U1 nyi] 2 K. nini no nsdjh tiaon on udii nx>i. — ora or^]
XXIV. 1-27] REIGN OF JOASH 437
a modified form of av or, Koe. iii. § 89.— 12. yiMn^] i ms., (S + ?non.
— n-jMj?] read with 14 MSS., (6, B, and as in v.'^ ii?iy, so Bn., Ki. (S els
before mny = 'yS (cp. M with (6 in 352 i Ch. 2821) suggests that n is
original but belongs as the art. with pdnSc, cf. 2 K. 1212. — 13. nanN]
properly healing, hence restoration of walls, c/. Ne. 4', also with nSj?.
— 14. iN^an dhiSdoi] a late idiom, rf. vv. "b. 25^ Dr. TH. p. 157 n. —
'IJI inis'yi] two objects after verbs of making, building, etc. Koe. iii.
327W. — mc] inf. cstr. as gen. Ges. § 1146.
15-22. The apostasy of Joash. — Wanting in 2 K., introduced
by the Chronicler, since some such apostasy was necessary from his
point of view to explain the disasters of the Syrian invasion, w.
23-24_ — 15 f . yj hundred and thirty years old was he when he died and
they buried him in the city of David with the kings]. This long life
of Jehoiada and respect paid at his death are delightful touches
of the Chronicler to the honour of the priest. How illy it fits into
the narrative is seen from the fact that his wife Jehoshabeath
(221'), the daughter of Jehoram and sister of Ahaziah, cannot well
have been older than twenty-five or twenty-six years at the time
of the massacre of the royal family by Athaliah, while Jehoiada
according to the age here given would have been then an old
man between ninety and one hundred. According to 2 K. 12'
he was alive and active in the twenty-third year of the reign of
Joash, and presumably lived some years beyond the period of
the restoration of the Temple. — 17. Came the princes of Judah].
The existence of a party at court favouring the worship of Baal
and desiring its restoration is historically extremely probable.
This movement may be regarded as a revolt of the nobility against
the hierarchy (Erbt, Die Hebrder, p. 121). Certainly some ul-
terior motive besides the mere desire of Baal-worship must have
been behind it. — 18. The Asherim and the idols]. Cf. 14'.
Both terms are probably used here with about the same force
— that of the latter. — And wrath was upon Judah, etc.] mani-
fested in the invasion of Hazael, w.'"-. — 20. And the spirit of
God clothed] i.e., took possession of him, cf. i Ch. i2'8, also 2 Ch.
151. — Zechariah the son of Jehoiada' the priest] not mentioned
elsewhere in the OT. — And he stood above the people]. He ad-
dressed them from some elevation. Cf. Je. 36'" where Baruch
438 2 CHRONICLES
reads Jeremiah's roll from the window of an upper chamber, and
Ne. S* where Ezra reads the Law from a pulpit of wood (Ba.).
A reference to the elevation of the inner, the priests' court, com-
pared with the outer, or people's court (Ke., Zoe.), does not
seem appropriate. — Because ye have forsaken, etc.\ Cf. 15^ — 21.
And they conspired against him]. Perhaps the proceedings were
the same as in the case of Naboth (i K. 21' '■), i.e., a mock trial
and a formal execution at the commandment of the king (Ba.).
This martyrdom of Zechariah is mentioned by Christ (Mt. 23'*
Lk. ii*") in a way that shows that the Jewish Scriptures were
practically the present Heb. Canon beginning with Genesis and
closing with i and 2 Chronicles. — In the court of the house of
Yahweh]. The tradition of the NT. times defined this more
exactly "between the sanctuary and the altar."
15. B'S'' . . . ipi"'i] cf. I Ch. 23'. — 17. TN] with pf. emphatic result
Koe. iii. § 13S. — 18. no rs] wanting in (S"'-^, S>'^. — pxr anrrcso] ^"^
iv TTj iifjiipq. TavT-Q. nxi without art. after subst. defined by a pronom.
suf. Dr. TH. § 209 Obs., Koe. iii. § 334y. — 19. ni,-ii Sn] (&^^ -\- Kal o6k
iJKOVcrav, so also S*. — 20. n>-\3r] (g^A ^5^ 'Afop/ay = njiii".— at>'M] impf.
consec. since the reference is to what is past. Dr. TH. § 127 (7).— 21.
inDjn>i pn] double object after aj">, elsewhere pxa, Lv. 20=, Koe. iii.
§ 327 o. — 22. iCN iriC3i] V. s. V. ».
23-24. The Syrian invasion Based upon 2 K. 12" f-,
although the narrative has been entirely rewritten. According
to 2 K., Hazael, King of Syria, who had made an inroad into the
territor}' of Philistia and taken the city of Gath, proposed to move
against Jerusalem and was bribed by the treasures of the Temple
and the palace to leave the city unmolested. According to the
Chronicler, the Syrians came against Judah and Jerusalem and
destroyed all the princes of the people and sent their spoil unto
the King of Damascus. Thus the Chronicler brings upon the
princes a just retribution for their seduction of Joash into idolatry
(v. "). The Syrians also with a small force gained a victory over
a very great host, because they had forsaken Yahweh the God of
their fathers — a good illustration of the Chronicler's pragmatic con-
struction of history. — 24. Aiui upon Jo' ash they executed judgments]
XXIV. 1-27] REIGN OF JOASH 439
a fitting summary showing the Chronicler's view of this contact
between Judah and Syria, and his sole interest in the narrative.
25-27. The death of Joash. — Based upon 2 K. 12'' -'. —
25. And when they departed from him]. This immediate con-
nection between the departure of the Syrians is not found in 2 K.
— For they had left him very sick] (lit. in many diseases) also
not mentioned in 2 K., and probably a retributive touch of the
Chronicler, who felt that Joash should suffer to the uttermost for
his sins. Cf the sicknesses of Asa (161=) and Joram (21" "f). Ke.
saw in the diseases wounds received in battle with the Syrians. — For
the blood of the son* of Jehoiada the priest]. Neither this motive
nor any other is recorded in 2 K. for the assassination of Joash. —
On his bed] also lacking in 2 K. 12=°, which says that he was
slain "at the house of Millo," an obscure reference. — And they
buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepidchres of the
kings]. The parallel (2 K. i22>) reads, "And they buried him
with his fathers in the city of David." The Chronicler's modi-
fication was doubtless due to his desire to make the end of Joash
as unfortunate as possible and therefore he refused him a place in
the tombs of the kings.— 26. Zabad] 2 K. 12" «>' "Jazacar " {v. i.).
— Shime ath the Ammonitess and . . . Shimrith the Moahitess] a
curious change of the Chronicler. In 2K. 122^ <-" we have "Shim-
eath" and "Shomer," the names of the fathers of the conspira-
tors. Here they have become their mothers and their descent is
made half heathen. Thus the fate of Joash is made still more
opprobrious, and the Chronicler likewise expresses thus his aver-
sion to the marriage of Hebrews with foreigners — their offspring
are murderers (Tor. Ezra Studies, pp. 212/.). — 27. And the great-
ness of the burden upon him]. The burden is not the tribute
exacted from him by the Syrians (Kau.), an old opinion, since
that is not mentioned in Chronicles, nor the tribute collected for
the Temple, also an old opinion, but the prophetic utterances
against him (Ke., Ki., Bn., Ba., RVm.). — And the rebuilding] (lit.
founding). Cf. vv. '^f.. — The Midrash of the Book of Kings].
Cf. Intro, p. 23.
23. rflipn'^] at the coming round, circuit, i.e., at the completion (of the
year), cf. Ex. 34^2 (JE) i S. i^", Ps. 19' f- — '"<^''' O"*** ^'^ ^''^J' nSyJonpf.
44° 2 CHRONICLES
after •'HM V. s. v.", and on collectives construed with sg. and following
pi. see Koe. iii. § 346d. — nyc] 05 read oya, II, &, omit. — pirmi] cf. i6^
I Ch. i8' '•. — 24. lyxD] a small thing, equivalent to ijJtD, cf. Gn. 1920 =0
(J) (ofcity), Jb. 8'(of Job's fortunes), Is. 63's (of time) f-— 25. onsSai
ntt'iinn . . .] cf. same construction in v. '^ — o^SnD f] cf. d^nShp 21".
— ''J3] read with C6, H, ja cf. v.^o, so Be., Zoe., Oe., et al. Present
text may be due to dittography. — moo Sj; injin^i] 2 K. 1221 fNi^ ns is'i
nSd Tiin nSd n'3. — mji inijpii] 2 K. 1222 m T'ya vnas dj? ipn Ti3p''i.
— 26. ni^Ninn nnc!:' p lannii n^'jisyn nyDC p nar] 2 K. 1222 p idtvi
•yc'Zf p ^2!1^"l1 nyDtr. Ki. thinks i3t derived from following •^2nr\^ and
corrects to nor, but (g^ Za/3e\ (A for A) and (S^l Za/3e^, Za/3a0 read
n2T. Many mss. of 2 K. read njtn, which the Chronicler may have
shortened intentionally because of the following nann\ — 27. 3ii] Qr.
3i;. probably intended to give the sense, aud as regards his sons, may
the oracle against him increase. Better read Kt. 3^1 with Kau., Oe.,
et al., but text is probably corrupt. (& Kal irpocrijXdov read mpi, also
nt:'cn for N'i'cn. — snic] see on 13".
XXV. The reign of Amaziah (c. 796-782 b.c). — A reproduc-
tion of the narrative of 2 K. 14' -'^ with the characteristic modifica-
tions and embeUishments of the Chronicler. The statements of
2 K. 14^ that "the high places were not taken away" and that
"the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places,"
are omitted, doubtless because too derogatory to Amaziah in
the beginning of his reign, when he won the victory over the
Edomites. The story of this victory very briefly narrated in 2
K. 14' is enlarged by the Chronicler. The size of the army of
Amaziah is given (v. ^), and details of the slaughter of the Edomites
(v. '2); and especially a new episode is introduced in the account
of the rejection, at the command of a prophet, of troops hired at
a large expense of northern Israel (vv. «-'"). This rejection fur-
nishes (according to Bn.) a ground for the subsequent victory over
the Edomites as a reward of obedience and reliance upon Yahweh.
Yet quite contrary to this notion of reward is the plundering of the
cities of Judah by these mercenaries mentioned in v. ". Hence this
plundering has been taken as an interpretation, found in one of
the sources of the Chronicler, of the disaster which befell the
S. kingdom through Amaziah's unfortunate contest with the N.
kingdom (2 K. i4'-'0) this source having made the disaster very
inconsiderable, while the Chronicler himself, on the other hand,
XXV. 1-28] REIGN OF AMAZIAH 44 1
accepted the record of 2 K. and allowed the disaster to remain
to its full extent but supplied an adequate reason by introducing
the sin of the worship of the gods of Edoni (vv. '*'«) (Bn.).
Agreeable to the above view, Bn. and Ki. assign vv. ^-la to M, but they
have the marks of the Chronicler's style: in v. » nny Hiph. (1. 89), no
HDN (1. 14), S with ace. also in v. '"(l. i28),-\in3 (c/. 11' 133- •'), njxincitnN
(c/. ii'2 147); in v.6 ^^n -inj (cf. 133 i7'«'); in v. « ptn ni:>j7 (cf. 19'"
Ezr. io4) and "nrjrS (1. 84); in vv. "• '^ nnj (1. 17); in v." pinn^ (1. 38);
and in v." nra (1. 10). — Graf thought that some historical event not
recorded in K. was at the basis of the story of the hire of the Israelitish
troops and their subsequent plundering {GB. p. 158). This seems not
unlikely, and the narrative then may be the Chronicler's interpretation of
these facts from whatever source he may have derived them.
1-4. The beginning of the reign of Amaziah. — Taken with
slight omissions and variations from 2 K. i4'-«. — 2. But not with a
perfect heart] with reference to the apostasy described in v. '^ In
the place of this 2 K. 14' reads, " Yet not like David his father: he
did according to all that Joash his father had done." Then comes
V. \ concerning the retention of the high places, which the Chron-
icler has omitted (v. s.). — 3. His servants who had killed the king
his father]. Cf. 24^'= 2 K. 12-' "0)_ — 4, But he put not their children
to death]. The sparing of the children of the guilty was evidently
a new departure in jurisprudence, indicating an advance in the
moral sentiment of the community. When Naboth was con-
demned his children perished with him (2 K. 9"), and likewise the
children perished with the father in the story of Achan (Jos. 7^^ "■).
— But did according to that which was written in the law in the
book of Moses]. The writer of 2 K. found in this mercy of Amaziah
an application of the command given in Dt. 24'^ This principle
was emphasised by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Je. 31*' '•
Ez. i8=°).
1. pp.iH'] (gL 2 K. 142 Kt. ]^iy\n^ f. — 2. oStf 3a'73 nS pi] instead of
the longer statement in 2 K. 143b. t (v. s.). — 3. vSj!] ten mss., (6, g", 2 K.
14511^2. — j-iriM] 2 K. T'l, same change from 2 K. 1221 in 24^5 (v. s.). —
4. on^ja] 2 K. 146 a-'^nn ••12. — ■'3'] wanting in 2 K., possibly due to
dittography, so St. SBOT. on 2 K. 146. — hb'd -idD3 mina 2inDD] QI
omits mina, (5 Kara rrjv 5iadi}Kr]v {tov) v6/j.ov Kvplov Kaddis y^ypairrai,
(8^ -f- iv v6/M<{> M.u(T7j. U, &, 2 K. HB'D mm ncoa amja.— iniD^] three
442 2 CHRONICLES
times, 2 K. •inni'' twice (but Vrss. miD;); third time niD> Kt., so 01, S>, (H,
and Qr. hdv. Dt. 24'« inav three times, but 05, &, H, nsv third time.
The Chronicler either followed 2 K. (text of Vrss.) or simply quoted
inaccurately. — 'd^] with adversative force, Koe. iii. § 372c. 2 K. os >d,
wanting in Dt.
5-13. The campaign against Edom. — This is tersely de-
scribed in 2 K. 14' in a single verse, and there is no reason to sup-
pose that the additions of the Chronicler rest upon any additional
information, but are wholly a product of Midrashic fancy. The
Edomites subjugated by David and made tributary to Judah had
revolted successfully during the reign of Jehoram (21"'). Whether
the conquest of Amaziah resulted in the permanent possession of
Edom by Judah is uncertain. Perhaps no real conquest took
place. Indeed the whole campaign has been felt to be improbable,
since Edom was then tributary to Assyria, and Judah possibly a
vassal of northern Israel (the view of Winck. KAT.^ p. 261, also
Bn. cf. HC. 2 K. 14'). — 5. Three hundred thousand]. The army
of Amaziah is thus much smaller than that ascribed to Asa, 14' <">,
and also to Jehoshaphat, 17'^^-. This diminution of troops (ac-
cording to Ke.) furnished a reason for hiring additional ones from
northern Israel.— 6. A hundred talents of silver] if hea\'y weight,
some 9,650 pounds of silver, or if light weight, about half that
amount. — 7. A man of God] the most general OT. designation of
a prophet; used of Moses 30'« i Ch. 23" Dt. ;^y Jos. 14^ Ezr. 3'';
also of David 8'^ Ne. i22«- ^s; also of the angel who clearly in the
guise of a prophet appeared unto Manoah and his wife, Ju. i3«- «;
cf. for general use i S. 2" 9^ »• i K. 12" 13'- =« ly'^- 24 20=8 2 K.
I' et al. — Let not the army of Israel go with thee]. From the point
of view of the Chronicler, an alliance with Israel was sinful and
could only be followed by evil consequences, cf. 19' 20". — All
the children of Ephraim] an explanation of the preceding Israel,
since Israel is often used as equivalent to the S. kingdom {cf. 12').
— 8. But go thou, i.e., by thyself, do valiantly, be strong for the
battle, for God shall not* suffer thee to fall before thy enemy for God
has power to help and to cast down]. For other renderings of this
verse, whose text is corrupt, v. i. The sinfulness of any alliance
with the N. kingdom is brought out very strongly. — 9. Yahweh is
XXV. 1-28] REIGN OF AMAZIAH 443
able to give thee much more than this] a very beautiful teaching.
— 10. Wherefore their anger was greatly kindled against Judah and
they returned home in fierce anger\ Mercenary troops serve not
only for their hire, which these men are represented to have
received, but also for renown and booty which, through dismissal,
they would lose. This loss they are represented to have made
good in a way by plundering cities of Judah {cf. v. ■'). — 11. The
valley of Salt] from 2 K. 14^, mentioned also as the place of
Joab's victory over the Edomites, cf. 1 Ch. iS'^. — 12. And ten
thousand did the children of Judah carry away alive, etc.]. Of
this capture and massacre the record in 2 K. knows nothing,
although the rock (Sela') is mentioned as a place (2 K. 14') often
identified with Petra, but this is by no means certain (cf. Moore,
Ju. on i^=). — 13. From Samaria even unto Beth-horon]. Samaria
was evidently the point from which the troops started on their
raid and Beth-horon its limit southward. On the location of Beth-
horon cf. I Ch. 724. The raid may be thought of as having taken
place while Amaziah was in Edom.
5. mini px] d^ ^^ /I pij, (3 '1 r^N. — fcjai] 05°'^ Kal ^lepovcraX-^fj.
since only Judeans were gathered together, cf. 14' ly'^ ^■. — 6. 'J22] 2
pretii, Ges. § iigp, Koe. iii. § 332 o. — 8. □!< >j] with adversative force,
only, but, cf. 23^, merely a slightly strengthened 13, BDB. dn >3 2 b, Koe.
iii. § 2721. — ncnSc*? prn r\z'y nn.S Na] 05 inroXd^ris /carto-xCcrat iv toijtois,
05^ + if T<? 7roX^/x(f), H putas in robore exercitus bella consistere, i.e.,
r\Ti7hrh pjn>< nxtJ inNn (Oe. so also Bn., with slight changes). Ki.
reads dntj pin'? 2'unn nns, hut if thou thinkest to prevail in this way
(i.e., with help from the N. kingdom) then will God cause thee to fall
before the enemy. It is simpler to retain M. and before ^S■'ttO' to insert
n't! (t'. 5. soEw., Be.). Hitzig read pm nu'j; r\m D3 dn 13 (1;. Be.). As the
text stands the imv. is followed by Jussive in apodosis, Dr. TH. § 152 (2).
— For ainSiS (& twice nin\ — 9 . mi:'j;S nn] similar to use of inf. with b after
substantive verb expressing the idea of destination, cf. 2 K. 4'' Is. 5\ see
Dr. TH. § 203. — niKnS] Kt., but read Qr. hndS, which is also in many
MSS. as Kt. — on'? '•'h tt'i] Yahweh is able to give, on use of inf. with h
after si''', see Dr. TU. § 202 (i). — 10. injn'?] ace. with h in apposition
with pronom. suf. D-;^, Koe. iii. § 289k, a construction emphasising the
noun, Ew. § 2776. — 11. jnjii] ■^/ drive, conduct, hence lead out an army
to battle (late), cf. i Ch. 20'. — nSon n^j] so in i Ch. i8'2 and Kt. of 2 K.
14' but Qr. and Vrss. nSn n^i. — iiyB' ija pn] 2 K. 14' ons pn. — 12.
444 2 CHRONICLES
y'l'Dn] probably to be taken as a proper name, cf. 2 K. 14' {v. 5.). — 13.
n^Sc] inf. with JD of separation Koe. iii. § 406 o. — i!3f £3m] predicate intro-
duced by 1 with subject prefixed, cf. Gn. 22^ 30'°, Dr. TH. § 127 (a).
14-16. Amaziah's idolatry. — An introduction to the disas-
trous war with the N. kingdom not given in 2 K. {y. s.). — 14. The
gods of the children ofSeir]. It is a curious fact that of the ancient
reUgion of the Edomites, so closely associated with Israel, nothing
definite is known beyond the names of certain deities derived from
theophorous proper names. — 15. Who have not delivered their
people from thy hand] (cf. vv. " ' ) and hence were no gods. The
test of deity was ability to deliver. The fundamental reason for
worshipping Yahweh was the deliverance from Egypt (Ex. 20'
cf. Is. 37'^. — 16. Have we made thee a counsellor for the king?].
With this question corresponds the answer, / know that God hath
counselled to destroy thee.
14. Tjpi . . ninp'^:'''] freq. impf., Dr. TH. § 30 (2) (a), Koe. iii. §
157b. — 15. NOj] 31 + Baneani. Ci> read D''N''3J (it po(l)TfiT as) from
which with a transposition of 3J may have come the Bancam of ?C.—
16. '1J1 T^v'^n]. The question expresses strong repudiation, Dav.
Syn. § 126 R 5. — lunj] pi. for sg. as an expression for majesty, Koe.
iii. § 207b. — 113''] indef. subj. expressed by third pers. pi., Dav. Syn. §
108 (b).
17-24. The disastrous war with the N. Kingdom. — Taken
from 2 K. i4'-'S with additions in vv. "■ ^o to connect with the in-
troduction (vv. '^-'«), and also an addition in v. ^\ — 17. Took
counsel] or possibly we should render was counselled with the im-
plication that it was by divine agency {cf. v. '«). The phrase (?^J?T»1)
is introduced by the Chronicler to connect the passage closely
with the foregoing verse. Otherwise the verse agrees essentially with
the te.xt of 2 K. 14*. — Let us look one another in the face] (cf. v. =')
a challenge to war in sheer insolence (Be., Zoe., Sk.) or a vassal's
assertion of independence (Bn., Winck. KAT.^) or a proposal to
meet one another as equals, Amaziah seeking satisfaction for the
raid of the mercenaries (v. '') (Oe., Ba.). This last is a plausible
suggestion if the account of the raid is historical; but 2 K. does
not mention the raid. The proposal may have been for a meeting
XXV. 1-28] REIGN OF AMAZIAH 445
with the view of a marriage alliance (v. '»). — 18. This fable, re-
minding one of Jotham's parable (Ju. 9' " ), was a cutting insult
to Amaziah, implying that he was in no way on an equality with the
King of Israel. Whether the particulars of the fable were signifi-
cant, reflecting actual events, is unknown. — 20. For it was of God,
etc.] an addition of the Chronicler connecting the narrative with
vv. '<-'^ — 21. Looked one another in the face'] {i.e., joined in
battle) either a direct or an ironical application of the words of
V. '^ If ironical, cf. the similar double application of the phrase
"lift up the head," Gn. 40'^- ^K—Beth-shemesh]. Cf. i Ch. 6*'^''K
— Which belongeth to Judah]. This statement in 2 K. 14" shows
that the story of this contest is of northern Israelitish origin. — 22.
And then fled every man to his tent] i.e., fled to his home, cf. 7'" 10'".
— 23. The son of Jehoahaz] i.e., the son of Ahaziah, cf. 2V.
— And broke down the wall of Jerusalem from the Gate of Ephraim
unto the Gate of the Corner, four hundred cubits] i.e., a portion of
the oldest northern wall which was probably built in the time of
Solomon (cf. GAS. /. i. p. 206, and on the location of this wall,
pp. 241 ff.). — Gate of Ephraim] i.e., the gate through which the
road to Ephraim passed, on the line of the street running to the
present Damascus Gate. — Corner gate*] (v. i.) probably the
north-west angle of the wall {cf. GAS. /. ii. p. 116).— 24. With
'Obed-edom] an addition of the Chronicler to 2 K. 14'^. The
family oi'Obed-edom, according to i Ch. 26'^ had charge of the
storehouse of the Temple.
17. min'« iSd irr'scx Tyi^] wanting in 2 K. 148. — n'?t:'''i] 2 K. +
D"'DxSd. — q'^] cf. Nu. 23'' Ju. 19" 2 K. hdS. Possibly pointed according
to 2 K. when i"? was intended, so Oe. n) d'? accompanying the expres-
sion of a wish, cf. Gn. 1932 3i« and ref. above, Koe. iii. § 355g.—
d>:d nNnnj] !et us look one another in ike face, cf. v. 21 (v. s.), is probably
a shortened form for dijd Sn D'jo hni.-ij, Ges. § 156c, n. 1. — 18. ninn
(twice)] d transliterated, ^x^ff'- "Xoi'X ^"xof, axovx, the last being
original ($, cf. Tor. ATC. p. 65.— 19. mcx] wanting in 2 K. i4'« (but
supported by Vrss.), may be a later insertion by some one who read n''an
as first pers., so Bn., St. SBOT. on 2 K. 14'°, but the insertion may be
from the Chronicler. 05 read both as second pers. — njn] is certainly a mis-
reading of 2 K. nrn, so Ki. Kom. BH., Bn., St. SBOT. on 2 K., but
probably the original in Ch., cf. (&. g», here as elsewhere, appears to be
446 2 CHRONICLES
corrected from 2 K. — n'^^?] should probably be pointed cin'^n. —
lOanS] Hiph. as intrans. dub. 2 K. i3:n imv. Niph. (6 ri ^aptia, "B in
superbiam, & |n»/.|. The insertion of S has connected the word with
what precedes, contrary to 2 K. (8 probably read i^rn and H "i^rnS
# was doubtless corrected fr. 2 K. Read i^rn or i^rnV, so Oe., Ki, —
nny] wanting in 2 K. — nac] 2 K. 2t\ — ncS] 2 K. nc'?i. St. SBOT. con-
siders ncS original in K.; Bur. thinks 1 original there with sarcastic
force. — 20. 'ui 'NHD "'3] a characteristic addition by the Chronicler,
cf. 10'* 22^. &, corrected from 2 K., omits. — t^3 dp."] (&^^ tov irapadovvai
avrbv els x^'pas = a''T'3 inn, (Si^ + Iwas, U /« maniis hostium. Oe.
suggested it's. Perhaps read, as suggested by (&, D"];3 inn, to give him
into their hand. If text is correct ti is without the art. as in familiar
expressions, Dav. Syn. § 22 R 3, Koe. iii. § 294f. — 21 . § transposes
Nin D-jD iN-\ri^i and niin> i^d ih^xcni. — 23. rnNin'' p] wanting in (S^aj
six MSS., <&i^, 2 K. 14", innnN p. rnxinip has either been transposed from
a position after Sni!;'^ I'^n, or rnsin'' is a variant spelling or scribal error
for VTrnx , cf. 21I'. — msoM] 2 K. in2m. Ch. preserves the original
reading, so Bn., Ki., St., Bur., Sk. — -\j,td] 2 K. -\';z'2. Ch. also
original in K., so Bn., Ki., St., et al. — njion] doubtless a scribal error
for njsn of Vrss. and 2 K., so Ke., Zoe., Oe., and most commen-
tators.— 24. ^31] 2 K. i4», Sa PN n|->';'i, is read by Oe., Kau., Ki., Bn.
(&^ inserts i\a.^ev before 2B'''i, which is considered its original posi-
tion in 2 K. by Bn. (on 2 K.), St. SBOT. The late form of the
verb in K. suggests that it was added to fill a lacuna, see Ges. § ii2pp
(6 '■"'). — a''n':'Nn n^aa] 2 K mn> pia. — dun 13» d>"] wanting in 2 K. —
nuiynn ija] hostages, so also 2 K 14" f.
25-28. The end of Amaziah's reign. — Taken from 2 K.
1417-20^ with a characteristic addition of the Chronicler in v."
(v. i.). — 25. This verse, a copy of 2 K. 14'', is without point in
the narrative of the Chronicler, who systematically ignores the N.
kingdom. In 2 K. it is a note inserted by a scribe to mark the
interval between the death of Jehoash, just mentioned, and the
death of Amaziah immediately described. — 26. Book of the kings
of Judah and Israel]. The Chronicler substitutes for "the book
of the chronicles of the kings of Judah" of 2 K. i4'8 his own
principal noncanonical source (cf. Intro, p. 22). — 27. Now from
the time that Amaziah turned away from after Yahweh] a char-
acteristic addition of the Chronicler, who thus gives from his point
of view an adequate cause for the conspiracy. It was probably a
popular insurrection in favour of the young Uzziah, a result of the
XXVI. 1-23] REIGN OF UZZIAIx 447
misfortunes into which the state had been plunged by the folly of
Amaziah in provoking the war with northern Israel. — Lachish].
Cf. II'. — 28. In the city of David*]. The reading city of Judah
of fH is clearly a scribal error {v. i.), yet in the Assyrian in-
scriptions Asarhaddon called Manasseh king of the city of
Judah (GAS. /. i. p. 268).
26 . CJi-inxni D''ji5'Nin] a characteristic addition to the text of 2 K. 14'^
cf. 929 I Ch. 29". — Dj.-i nSh] three MSS-jg*,!!, omit xSn. Seven MSS., 51, 2
K. 14'* DH for Djn. Since the Chronicler uses both forms, on nS.t 2 Ch. 9^'
I2'5, and Djn 16" 20'^ 24", the original is uncertain. — SN-»!r''i mini i^^c]
2 K. 14'' mini id'^dS diem nan. — 27. mm . . . njJDi] wanting in 2 K,
i4'9. — nyni] (& kclI iv ry KatpQ, so also ?C. — ntt'pii] predicate, intro-
duced by 1 after time-determinations, Dr. TH. § 127 (/3), Koe. iii. § 366I.
— 28. i.n« nan-i] 2 K. 142" aScno lap^'i f, the change to act. in Ch.
necessitating the insertion of the object. — mim •\^-;2] twelve mss., Vrss.,
2 K. nMi, and so most commentators.
XXVI. The reign of Uzziah (c. 782-737 b.c.).— The book of
Kings contains only a very meagre account of the reign of Uzziah
(2 K. 15'-')) ^^^ y^t his reign was one of the longest in Judah and,
according to the glimpses given in the prophetical books, one of
unusual prosperity (cf. especially Is. 2 /.). This prosperity is
brought out in the Chronicler's account in w. s-", which are en-
tirely independent of 2 K., but have a place in the Chronicler's
reconstruction of that narrative. According to 2 K. 15^, Uzziah
was a leper, and the Chronicler, compelled by his theory of royal
history to find a cause for this affliction, does so in the presumptu-
ous sin of unlawfully offering incense (vv.^'-^"); and this act of
pride is closely linked with the King's prosperity and greatness
(vv. ■='). On the source of vv. '-'^ see the note introductory to
the comments upon them.
1-5. Uzziah's accession to the throne. — Vv. '-^ are a tran-
script of 2 K. 14^' '• 152 '■; v.^ is from the Chronicler. — 1. And all
the people of Judah took Uzziah . . . and made him king]. This
action was occasioned by the untimely death of Amaziah. Ordi-
narily the people are not mentioned as determining the royal
succession (cf. 22'). Since Uzziah was only sixteen years old and
Amaziah was fifty-four at his death, probably older brothers and
448 2 CHRONICLES
thus a first-born, were set aside in favour of Uzziah. — Uzziah]
2 K. 14^' "Azariah," and so 2 K. generally, while the Chronicler has
'Uzziah (v. i.). The connection between the two names is not
entirely clear. They are quite similar in Hebrew rT'^iy and
rr^iy, and the latter may have arisen through a corruption of
the former {DB. IV. p. 843). The names are somewhat similar in
meaning; Azariah means " Yahweh has helped," Uzziah, " Yah-
weh is my strength." This fact may have led to their interchange.
—2. He built Eloth, etc.]. On Eloth or Elath v. i. Elath {cf. 8")
had apparently been captured by Amaziah in his war against
Edom (25" '•) and then lost during the disastrous war with north-
ern Israel, and its recovery was one of the first exploits of Uzziah.
This is the natural meaning of this verse, especially in its connection
here, but in 2 K. 14=2 it is a part of the narrative of the reign of Amaziah,
hence its first half. He built Eloth and restored it to Judah, is held to refer
to Amaziah and to belong in the history of Amaziah with the account of
the war against Edom (2 K. 14') {KAT.^ p. 261, Bn.). Then the second
half of the verse belongs with the preceding verse or is a gloss.
5. The Chronicler now omits 2 K. 15s which says that the high
places were not taken away and that the people still sacrificed and
burnt incense in them, and writes this verse to explain the prosper-
ity of Uzziah described in w. ^'s. — Zechariah]. This prophet is not
mentioned elsewhere. It is barely possible that the name is derived
from the mention of Uzziah in the book of Zechariah (i40- —
WJio gave instruction in the fear^ of Gocf] (v. i.).
1. iHMjj] so also vv. 3- 8. 9. u. 14. 18. 18. 19. 21. 22. 23 372 Is. i> 6> 7' and
2 K. 15'^- 3*;-"iM? Ho. I' Am. 1' Zc. 14^ and 2 K. 1513- ^o; nnrg 2 K.
1421 151. 7. 17. 23. 27 I ch. 3'2; in''^-iTy 2 K. i5«- '; in Assy, inscrip.
Azriyd'H, {COT. 2 K. 15'), but now denied (A'^T.^p. 262, DB. IV. pp.
844/.). Thus Azariah appears only once outside of 2 K., and that in Ch.,
while Uzziah is found four times in 2 K. Both forms of the name are used
for a descendant of Kehath, cp. i Ch. 69 (2^) and 621 <36), also for a
son of Heman (with 'el for Yah), cp. i Ch 25'' and 25'8.— 2. mS^N] (g
M\6.e, H Ailath, 2 K. 1422 nS^N, and so Ki. SBOT., Kom., but n^'7>N
also in 2 Ch. S'' i K. g'^ 2 K. 166 f and n'r^N in Dt. 2' 2 K. ib^- ^ f- — ''"'"^
33^] temporal clause introduced by "'inN with inf., see Koe. iii. § 401a.
— 3. T\'h^2^'\ Kt. rT''7iD>, Qr. nj'^D^. cf. 2 K. 152 in^^'^Di f. (§" Xaata =
XXVI. 1-23] REIGN OF TJZZIAH 449
XaXta (A for A), ^i- If^fA'a, i' Icchelia.—^. vrh 'n'l] he -was in the act
of seeking, inf. with '? alter hm lo express the idea of aiming at a definite
purpose or turning toward an object, Ges. § 114/1.?, Dr. TH. § 204,
Koe. iii. § 3997. — oviSnh TNn? r^cn] who had understanding in the
vision of God, is strange, hence read rather rxn-:?, with many mss., <$,
&, ®, who gave instruction in the fear of God, so Ke., Oe., Kau., Ki.,
Bn. — a''n'?Ntn) (three times)] (S 7[^7\\
6-15. Uzziah's military and industrial prosperity. — This
section is without parallel in 2 K. and yet seems to contain
historical reminiscences.
Bn. thinks the Chronicler's immediate forerunner {Die Vorlage) had
here reliable ancient traditions, and Ki. sees in it (save v. ^'^ and vv. "
and '5b) material taken from some ancient reliable source. The compo-
sition, however, is throughout that of the Chronicler, and there is no
reason why these verses may not have been entirely written by him,
though possibly they were taken from his chief source the Midrash
{v. p. 22). The following are the marks of the Chronicler's composition
in vv."-": in w.''- '^ -wy (1. 84); in v. » N13S ^^•; (1. 127) and n'?;'-'?
(1. 87); in V." inj (1. 17); in v. '^ dt- Sy (1. 86); in v. " S in •'J3nSi
(]. 128).
6. Gaih]. Cf. I Ch. 7-'. — Jahzeh] mentioned in OT. only here,
unless after (^ in Jos. 15'^ and as Jabne'el Jos. 15", mod. Yebna,
twelve miles south of Joppa and four miles from the sea. Known
by its Greek name Jamnia, it figures considerably in Jewish history
from the time of the Maccabees and onward. After the fall of Jeru-
salem (70 A.D.) the great Sanhedrin removed thither, and for quite
a period it took the place of Jerusalem as the religious and na-
tional centre of the Jews (JE. vii. p. 18). — Ashdod] the famous
Philistine city about half-way between Joppa and Gaza, two or
three miles from the sea, the mod. Esdud (Jos. 11" 15*^ ' i S. 5' '■
et al.). — And he bitilt cities among the Philistines^] (y. i.). — 7.
'Arabians\ Cf. 17". — Gur-baal |] an unidentified place, and
the reading is doubtful {v. i.). — Meunim]. Cf. i Ch. 4*'.- — 8.
And the Ammonites gave tribute]. (^ has "the Meunim" {v. i.),
which reading is adopted by Bn. as demanded by the context from
the connection with the Philistines and Arabians and the following
statement that Uzziah's name spread abroad even to the entrance of
Egypt, a direction quite opposite from that of the territory of
2Q
450 2 CHRONICLES
i.\mmon. Ki., on the other hand, retains 'Anvnonitcs. This is
n^reeable to the mention of table latid in v.^" {v. /.) and their later
conquest by Jotham (27^). Probably they should be retained and
the notice considered as of no historical value. On the tribute,
cf. 17" 27^ — And his name spread abroad even to the entrance of
Egypt] i.e., his fame, or better, his power (Be., Ke., Zoe.). — 9.
I^he corner gate] the north-west corner of the wall {cf. 25"). —
The valley gate] formerly located at or near the Jaffa gate on
the west of the city (Rob. BR.^ i. p. 43; Schick, ZDPV. viii.
p. 272); but more probably near the south-west corner of the wall
{cf. Ne. 2" 3'0 (so Guthe, MuNDPV. 1895, pp. 10 /., also
Mitchell, JBL. 1903, pp. 108/., cf. GAS. /. i. pp. 177 ff.).—At
the angle]. Cf. Ne. 3"- "■ ". While there might be many of these
angles where the wall turned (Bn.), yet some particular one seems
to have been meant, probably at north-east corner (BDB.). — 10.
Towers] for the protection of his herds {cf. i Ch. 27" Mi. 4*). —
In the wilderness] the pasture land of Judah. — Cisterns]. The
Heb. word may also mean wells, but artificial reservoirs were con-
structed in Palestine from the earliest times for the storage of
water for man and beast. — The lowland] the Shephelah; cf. i
Ch. 27" 2 Ch. i'^ 9". — The table land] i.e., the elevated plateau
between the Arnon and Heshbon east of the Jordan, since mishmor
denotes this (Dt. 3'° 4^^ Jos. 13'- ''■ "• 2' 20' Je. 48s- ") (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Ba.). This agrees with the subjugation of the Am-
monites implied in v. »; but it is doubtful whether the restriction
of meaning to the territory east of the Jordan is necessary. — 11.
Going out to war in detachments by the number of their muster]
descriptive of the thorough organisation of the host (Ke., Zoe.).
This is better than to think the word in detachments (Tl"^^)
refers to marauding expeditions (Ba.). — 12. The heads of the
fathers^ houses]. Cf. i Ch. 9^^ The troops were mustered by
households or families. — Even the mighty men of valour] i.e.,
landed proprietors and other well-to-do people {cf.-2 K. 15=°). —
Two thousand six hundred] a number agreeable to actual condi-
tions during Uzziah's reign. These are assumed to have been the
commanders of the troops. — 13. Three hundred and seven thousand
and five hundred]. Cf. the armies of Amaziah, 300,000 (25^), and
XXVI. 1-23.] REIGN OF UZZIAH 45 1
the greater ones of Asa (14^) and Jehoshaphat (17'* «•). — 14.
Shields]. Cf. 14^ <»' 17" i Ch. 5'8. — Spears]. Cf. ib. — Helmets]
mentioned with the shield in Ez. 27'" 38^; cf. also i S. 17^ Je. 46^
fig. Is. 59" f. — Cuirasses] mentioned also in iS^^ i K. 22" iS. 17^''
Ne. 4'" ('«> fig. Is. 591'. — Bows and sling-stones] the weapons of the
light-armed troops assigned so frequently to Benjamin (14" <^' i
Ch. 12^ Ju. 2o'«). — 15. And he made contrivances the invention of
inventive men . . . to shoot arrows and great stones]. Such engines
of warfare are not mentioned elsewhere in the canonical OT., but
were probably used by the Assyrians in the days of Uzziah, and he
may have introduced them as weapons of defence for Jerusalem (so
apparently Bn.), or their mention may merely reflect the methods
of defence used in the period of the Chronicler (so EBi. IV^ col.
4510, cf. GAS. /. ii. pp. 121/.).
That the statements of these verses are in substance historical
appears from the following facts: (i) Hezekiah seems largely to
have had control of Philistia, and this is most reasonably explained
upon the ground of the strong military policy of Uzziah; (2)
Jerusalem made a strong defence during the reign of Hezekiah
against the Assyrians and this was probably due to the preparations
made by Uzziah; (3) the prosperity of the days of Ahaz revealed
in the prophecies of Isaiah (v. s.) (DB. IV. p. 844). The mention
also of Arabians in the Assyrian inscriptions among the de-
fenders of Jerusalem against Sennacherib has been thought to
sustain the statement that Uzziah subjugated them (this, how-
ever, is rather remote) (v. DB. s.).
6. ■m!:'X3 Dn>'] can only mean cities in the territory of Ashdod, but
then the additional Q1^:^•'?^::1 is strange. Probably ^n!r^•2 is a copyist's
repetition and the text should read Din!f'7fl2 Dnynjaii (Ba.). Winckler
thinks that original text of source was nj^i PDin nxi nj noin rx T"'2''i, and
that the remainder of the verse has come from a marginal note which first
read nntrs'a nv "a city in the territory of Ashdod " {i.e. Jabneh), and that
this had been reconstructed into its present form (KAT.^ p. 262). — 7.
COiyn] Qr. O-ianyn. — Sya nu^] (B iirl ttjs irirpas Kal itrl toi>s Meivalov^,
i.e.: (i) -11X3 also the text of 11* in Turbaal adopted by Ki. Kom.; (2) (g
read Syi instead of Sj?3 adopted by Bn. after Winck., who sees in
in Guri a name of Edom in the Amarna Tablets (Gesch. i. 46).
We then read against the Arabians in Gur and against the Mcimim.
452 2 CHRONICLES
The Greek translator probably thought of Petra. 01 has ■<"iJ3 favoured
by Zoe., Ba. — a''ji;'::ni] five mss.,T5 DijiDj:ni, (B M(£)iyaioKS, cf. 2o'. — 8.
0'ji::yn] (§ 'M{e)ii'aToL as though D^jiyon which Bn. adopts after Winck.
(KATJ p. 262), but (5 may have been influenced by the preceding
M(e)ipaiovs, cf. 20'. — 'ui t; ictt' •[^^^] according to Ki. an annotation of
the Chronicler. — ansa] Winck. also sees in this the Arabian Musri.
■ — 10. nii:'iS3i n^Drji] both in the lowland and in the plain; 1' is
wanting in 05. — ansN] wanting in (Sba_ — Smo] neither Mt. Carmel nor
Carmel in southern Judah (i S. 252- '), but garden land, fruitful fields fls.
29" Je. 2^). — n-^-iN jnx] lover of husbandry, or possibly tillage, see BDB.
nniN i;cf. 's-n r^x Gn. 920 (J). — 11. N3X insv] cf. i Ch. 518. — -ibD33
'ui] wanting in §.—':'Nir] Kt. 'iy% Qr., (i>, H '•'>•?. — 14. '^2^ . . . an"^]
the noun made prominent by referring to it first through its pron. Ew.
§ 309 c, Koe. iii. § 340 o. — a''ySp >ja.s] sling-stones, cf. y'^p 'ws Jb. 412".
PI. in nomen rectum occasioned by pi. in nomen regens, Koe. iii. § 2676.
— 15. nuarn] contrivances, cf. Ec. 7^9 also pl. abs. f- — xi"'''^] Qal inf.
cstr. from \/ m\ but following the analogy of verbs N'S, Ges. § "JSrr. — •
-<T;jn'? N'lSijn 13] Hiph. expressing an action in a definite direction, the
principal idea being contained in the inf., Ges. § ii^n and n. 3.
16-23. Uzziah's leprosy and the conclusion of his reign.
— Based on 2 K. 15^'. The narrative of 2 K. simply records tliat
Uzziah was a leper; but the Chronicler (or his forerunner, Bn.)
adds the cause, which he finds in his presumptuous exercise of the
priests' sacred right of burning incense and in his anger against the
high priest and his associates when they rebuked him. This is
doubtless a mere legend to explain the King's leprosy, since that
disease was felt to be a token of special divine judgment {cf. the
leprosy of Miriam Nu. 12^ s- and Gehazi 2 K. 5", v. also Bn. Arch.
pp. 481 /.). A reflection of a real controversy between Uzziah and
the priesthood has been seen in this story (Bn., Ki.), and the possi-
bility of such an historical kernel must be admitted, but no indica-
tion of it is given elsewhere. — 16. To offer incense upon the altar
of incense'] an especially sacred act, and, according to P, lawful
only for the seed of Aaron {cf. v. '^ Ex. 3o>-i» Nu. 16^" 18'"). — 17.
And 'Azariah the priest] not identified or mentioned apart from
this narrative {cf. v. ^o); a favourite name in priestly genealogies
{cf. I Ch. 53610 (69-'^)). — 19, ^fid while he was wroth with the priests
the leprosy broke forth, etc.]. Cf. the sudden appearance of leprosy
in Gehazi, 2 K. 525 ". — 20. Yahweh had smitten him] adapted
XXVI. 1-23.] REIGN OF UZZIAH 453
from 2 K. 15*-', which is here taken up. — 21. In a separate honse'\
(v. i.). The King as a leper kept by himself and retired from royal
functions. — For he was cut off from the house of Yahweh] is not
found in 2 K., a natural observation from the Chronicler, who laid
great stress on worship. — 22. Did Isaiah the prophet tlie son of
Amoz write]. The reference is either to an independent work by
Isaiah (Ke.), which is most unlikely, or a part of the Book of the
Kings of Israel and Judah (Be., Zoe.), or possibly the statement
is derived from the fact that the present book of Isaiah mentions
Uzziah. — 23. And they buried him with his fathers in the field of
the burial which belonged to the kings; for they said, he is a leper] i.e,
he was not buried in the tombs of the kings, lest they should be
defiled by a leprous body, but in the field adjoining these tombs.
The Chronicler thus departed from the statement of 2 K. 15',
"And they buried him with his fathers in the city of David."
16. i.-i|iin3i] a late idiom, Dr. TH. p. 157 n. — nS njj] he became
haughty, lit., his heart was lifted up, cf. 322s Ps. 131' Pr. i8'2 Ez. 282- s. n^
and in the same sense without jS Is. 3'^ Je. 1315 Ez. 165° Zp. 3". — '7j?D''i]
cf. V. '5 I Ch. 2^ — 19. iprii) isyr^i] out of humour, dejected, but
only here enraged, a late sense like Aram, •i^^'^ rage against. —
'xni] 1 with the apodosis as an emphatic copulative after a temporal
conditional inf., Koe. iii. § 4157. — nmi] rise, come out, usually of
sun, only here of leprosy. — 20. innry] wanting in (&^^, ^ \j^q^. —
imj] hasten (late), cf. Est. 612 and in Qal pass. pt. Est. 3'5 8" f-—
nini irJJ 13] 2K. 155-i'^cn nx mni pri. — 21. nia] = n^33. — nitt'onn] so Kt.
and ten mss. in 2 K., but Qr. and 2 K. nic — f. Meaning is obscure.
(g" a.(p(pov(TLwv, A aircpovcriijd, ^ a<f)(j>ov<rwd, hence original (S doubtless
a<p(pov<ru}d as in 2 K., cf. Tor. ATC. p. 65. U (in domo) separata.
n^c'cn n-^j, apart in his palace (Klo., Ki., et al., on 2 K. and Ki.
SBOT., Kom. on Ch., yet see St. SBOT. on 2 K.). Stade {ZA W. vi. pp.
156 ff.) emends to linn n>33 in the winter-house; Gratz nnsDcn in the
house of eruption, Haupt (note in SBOT. on K.) nic'jnn r^>2, either
place of detention or place of bandaging. But 05, a(f><l>ov(rw0, seems to
have read mcsn, a verb used only of leprosy (Lv. 13, 14), hence n'>22
nits'sn i)i the house of spreading, i.e., a house rendered unclean by the
spreading of the leprosy after an attempt had been made to cleanse it
(Lv. 14") was appropriated for the King's use. — r\^7[-' n^aa -\rjj o >'-i:;d]
not in 2 K. — I'^nn n''^ Sy 1J3] <B 5 uWs avTov i-rrl rrjs paaiXeias avrov,
2 K. T\>27\ ^t; iSon p. — 22. I'lCvX p] wanting in <&^^. — 23. vpjn Dy2]
wanting in six mss. and & ; probably dropped as inconsistent with the
454 2 CHRONICLES
following clause. — xm j,nixs i-i5n •'3 a^D^':^ iti's mnpn r^■^•z<2] 2 K. 15'
-in T'>'3. The motive for the Chronicler's expansion is evident. — S t^'n]
used because nonien re gens is compound, Koe. iii. § 28 2e.
XXVII. 1-9. The reign of Jotham (co-regcnt c. 751-737;
reigned c. 737-735 B.C.). — From 2 K. i5"-38^ ^yiih slight changes
and the addition of new material in vv. '-«, which, like 26^-'*, con-
tain a tradition probably of historical worth (Pa. EHSP. p. 232).
They show that Jotham continued the vigorous policy of his
father. (For source-analyses of vv. '« see w. ^ '■.) — 1. A copy of
2 K. 15". — Zadok] possibly the high priest mentioned in i Ch.
1^38 (^612) (Be.). — 2. Only he did not enter into the temple of Yahiveh'\
a reference to Uzziah's sacrilege (26'' «•) naturally wanting in
2 K. — And the people did yet corruptly]. The fuller statement of
2 K. 15'= is, "Only the high places were not removed; the people
still sacrificed and btirnt incense in the high places." — 3. He built
the upper gate of the house of Yahweh] from 2 K. 15=5; the re-
mainder of the verse and vv. "-« are independent of 2 K. (v. s.).
The upper gate was probably the one in the north wall of the
Temple court mentioned in Je. 20- as "the upper gate of Ben-
jamin" (Bn., Sk.).— Ophel]. Cf 33'^ Ne. 3"J, a spur south of
the Temple by some held identical with the city of David (so
GAS. EBi. II. col. 2418, cf. also /. i. pp. 152/.). Cf. on this
verse and the following the activity of Uzziah (26" ), which
Jotham in all probability continued. — 5. He fought also with the
king of the children of 'Amnion] accepted by Ki. as a trust-
worthy tradition, but rejected by Bn. on the ground that the
S. kingdom had nothing to do with the Ammonites, and hence
either a fiction or a misreading of Meunim the people of Ma on
(cf. 26^ '-). — A hundred talents of silver and ten thousand measures
of wheat] i.e., in United States value and measure some $187,500
and 120,331 bushels. This statement is assigned by Ki. to the
Chronicler, while otherwise v. % from and on the wall, and v. ' are
assigned to some ancient reliable source {cf 26^-'=). — 6. This verse
is clearly an observation of the Chronicler. — 7. Corresponds with
the summary of 2 K. 15=^ — The Book of the Kings of Israel and
Judah] (v. Intro, p. 22). The Chronicler omits 2 K. 15", "In
those days the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin- the king
xxvn. i-xxvm. 27.] reigns of jotham and ahaz 455
of S}Tia and Pekah the son of Rcmaliah," a statement out of
harmony with his view of the reign and character of Jotham {cf.
v.«). — 8. A repetition probably from a copyist of v. >, yet cf. 28'.
— 9. A copy of 2 K. i5''», with slight changes {y. i.).
1. nu'n>] 2 K. 15^3 x-'n^ f. — 2. r^vv] in 2 K. 15'^ is followed by a
superfluous r\z'-;. — nini Va^n S>s n3 nS pi] added by the Chronicler. —
Dv-''nr?; Xi';^ ii^i] 2 K. is'^ T^^•Z21 an-jp::i a-nj?;; nyn -w;. — 3. nj3 ... 3]
bu!ltal,cf.Ne.4^^ "')Zc. 6'5, see BDB. 2,1. 2. bandnjo, i. h. — 4. pvjio]
(gL adds ^v lepovffaXrjfi, cp. (gcomp.. fU jg probably original. nvji^J, cf.
17'= f. — 5. I'^n] wanting in two mss., A, by copyist's and translator's
correction, although i^d ma> be a gloss as is suggested by ani'^y,
which (§ has corrected to ^tt' avrbv. — N^nn nj:;'^] ^ Kar' ^waurdv.
— 3''an an:] nouns in apposition, Ges. § iT,id; Koe. iii. § 333d. —
|1Dj; ^J3'] ^^-^ + Kar'' iviavrbv iv T(fi wpdjTip an unnecessary addition
due to the mistranslation of Ninn r\iZ'2 {v. s.).—Q. Wanting in <&^, ^.
— 9. ins nDpii] 2 K. 1528 + vnax ay "i^j^m. — T^n] 2 K. +ti3n.
XXVIII. The reign of Ahaz (r. 735-715 ? b.c). — In this
chapter we have one of the best examples of the reconstruction of
history by the Chronicler (or his Midrashic source (Bn., Ki.)).
According to 2 K. 165 Is. 71 «■ Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah,
King of Israel, together invade Judah. But the Chronicler pictures
their invasion as two separate and distinct events, both fraught
with signal disasters far exceeding those mentioned in 2 K. or Is.
(vv. 5-8) and accompanied also with prophetic activity and
influence (vv. s-'^). According to 2 K. 16' Ahaz sought success-
fully the help of Tiglath-pileser against the combined hostility
of Syria and Israel, but according to Ch. (vv. is-'') the Assyrian
King was invoked against the Edomites and the Philistines, and
his aid availed nothing, but resulted rather in the oppression of
Judah. According to 2 K. i6« Ahaz sent unto Tiglath-pileser, to
secure his services, a present of the treasures of the Temple and
of the palace; but according to Ch. (v. 2') these treasures were
vainly given to secure immunity from the oppression of the
Assyrian King. According to 2 K. i6"'-i« Ahaz introduced into the
Temple a new altar, copied from one at Damascus, and modified
the ritual of sacrificial worship. This in Ch. (v. ") becomes an
act of sacrifice to the gods of Damascus. According to 2 K. 16" '•
456 2 CHRONICLES
Ahaz cut up the bases or stands of the lavers of the Temple (r/. 4'
I K. 7=' " ) and also the base of the great lavcr (4= ' i K. 723 a)
clearly to secure money for the tribute paid to the King of Assyria,
and he made some structural changes, not clear, in an entrance to
the Temj)le; in Ch. (vv. -'^ ' ) he cuts in pieces generally the utensils
of the Temple and closes the building, erecting in the mean time
altars in every corner of Jerusalem and in every city of Judah
high places to hum incense unto other gods. The motive for
this new treatment of the reign of Ahaz is clear. It brings into
greater relief punishment for sins. The disasters which befell
Judah are multiplied, and Ahaz becomes more and more con-
spicuous as a sinful and wicked ruler. His reliance upon Assyria
brings only trouble. The Chronicler could not conceive of it
otherwise. He thus entirely reconstructs the history.
The sources of this chapter, omitting vv. '-^^ (dji) 3b-4 from 2 K.,
according to Ki. {Koin.) (after Bn.), are vv. ^b-sa from the Chronicler;
vv. 5-'^- '5-^ M; and vv. ''-'*, separating v. '^ and v. '^ and of a different
character, are from another source, one of historical value. These last
are, however, parallel to 2 K. 16^ (so Ki. Kom.) and might even have been
introduced in a Midrashic reconstruction of 2 K. 16^--^. They are also
closely bound in unity with the remainder of the chapter by the reference
to captives in v. '^ {cf. vv. ^ n. i5)_ The following marks of the Chron-
icler's style appear in vv. ^■'^■. in v. ' omission of rel. after '\yt2 (1. 120),
D T^^ n>' (1. 127); in w. lo- '3 nD-.:'N (1. 7); in v. ^ •'ji>*r:u' (1. 115); in v. 12
list of proper names; in v. " nra (1. 10); in v. '^ i^pj (1. 75) and S in SoS
(1. 12M); in vv. 19- 22S>-3 (1. 68); in v. "b verb omitted (1. 1176); and
in v. M T'j:i I';? S331 (1. 124).
1-4. The character of the reign of Ahaz. — Taken from 2 K.
16=-^ with a few characteristic additions. — 2. And made also molten
images for the Baalim] an addition of the Chronicler, yet the
use of images in worship during the reign of Ahaz is abundantly
proved by Is. 2^-^^- 20. — 3. Moreover he burnt incense in the valley
of the son of Hinnotn] wanting in 2 K. Added by the Chroni-
cler as introductory to the mention of the sacrifice of his son, since
this valley was the seat of human sacrificial worship {cf. Je. 7").
The valley of the son of Hinnom lies to the south and south-west
of Jerusalem, the mod. er-Rahdhi {cf. GAS. /. i. pp. 173 ff.). —
And he burnt his children] in 2 K. 16' "And made his son pass
!
XXVm. 1-27.] REIGN OF AHAZ 457
through the fire," i.e., sacrificed his son {v. i.). The stories of
Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac (Gn. 22) and of Jephthah's vow
(Ju. 1 1'" '• 5^ «•) show that human sacrifice was not unknown in the
early days of Israel, but it probably was of very rare occurrence
until the period of Ahaz, who clearly fostered the rite, as did also
Manasseh {t,^ 2 K. 2i«), and thus in the later years of the kingdom
of Judah it became a not uncommon feature of religious worship
((/. 2 K. 17" 21^ 23'" Mi. 6' Je. 7" 19^ Ez. i62<' '■■ Ps. 106" f).^
4. And he sacrificed, etc.] (2 K. 16') not merely allowed the
people to do so, as the best of his predecessors had done. — Under
every spreading tree] a Deuteronomic and Jeremianic expression
(Dt. 122 I K. 14" 2 K. 16^ (here copied) 17'° Je. 2=° 3"- "). The
usual rendering " green " is slightly misleading. The reference
is not so much to colour as to condition and size. A large, fine
tree is meant.
1. ani:'>' p] ms. 5«^ (g^ss.^ §^ _^ + ^.-n% which makes a more suitable
age, cf. 29', and so Ew., Th., Be., Oe., and Ki. Kom., BH. (doubtfully);
but ^BAL follow m and the variants may be due to the influence of 27'- «
29'. However, 27 » may be a marginal gloss to 28' which crept into the
wrong place. — fnx] in Assy, inscrip. la-u-ha-zi {KB. ii. p. 20, COT.
on 2 K. 168) = THNin^, which is the full name. — nin'] many mss. and
2 K. 162 + rnSx probably a scribal addition, so St. — 3. ajn p nu] so
Je. 731- 32 ig2. 6 3225; 'T\ o ^J 2 Ch. 2,i^ Jos. 158 18'6 2 K. 23'" Qr. (Kt.
'n >ii M); 'n nm Ne. 11'"; 'n >J Jos. 158 18'6 f . — -i;;3:i]oneMS.,05,g'-i3;'n,
2 K. i63 -tpv"!, and so Be., Kau., Bn., but others hold that -\i-; is euphe-
mistic for the earlier nyj, hence Ch. retains the original form, Ba., Ki.
SBOT., V. Geiger, Urschr. p. 305. — vjj] g-, 2 K. in and so Oe., Ba.,
Bn., but B probably, as elsewhere, is corrected from 2 K. — nini] 2 K.
5-7. The disasters through Syrian and Israelitish inva-
sions.— Recorded as punishments for the idolatry of Ahaz. The
results of the war here given are very different from those mentioned
in 2 K., where the allied armies besieged but could not take Jerusa-
lem (16^) and caused the loss of Elath (i6«). The Chronicler's
account has been held to supplement the other (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.,
Ba.), and probably some historical events grossly exaggerated un-
derlie the stories of the captives taken and of the great slaughter.
— 5. The king of Syria] i.e., Rezin {cf. 2 K. 16^ Is. 7'- ^ 8»). — A
458 2 CHRONICLES
great multitude of captives]. Nothing like this is recorded in 2 K.
— Arid he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel]. In
2 K. and Is. the invasion of the two kings is a joint one. Here
the representation is of two independent ones (v. s.). — 6. For
Pekah slew in Judah one hu7idred and twenty thousand in one day]
Nothing of this is mentioned in 2 K. Such a great number of
the slain is a usual feature of the Midrash (cf. 13")- — 7. And
Zichri]. On the occurrence of the name cf. i Ch. 8'^, for that of
the following names, v. i. Zichri probably was a real hero of
northern Israel in this war (Bn.). — The king^s son] if historical,
probably a brother or uncle of Ahaz. — Ruler of the house] i.e., oi
the palace, probably the treasurer or steward is meant (cf. Is. 22'^
36'). — That was next to the king] scarcely the captain over the
host, but the grand vizier, sometimes called the recorder (1''5.TP)
(cf. Now. Arch. I. p. 308).
5 . p;:'3-n] cf. r Ch. 18'. — ynj] 05 + avrbv. 1 may have dropped out
before the following in; thus Bn. reads Mn. — 6. aor;"j] in their for-
saking, i.e., because they had forsaken, causal clause, Koe. iii. § 403a.
— 7. iidt] ($^ Zaxctptas. This is interesting because "'"\d! is an abbre-
viation of innot, £S/. III. col. 3292. — inv^-'jir:] (cf. i Ch. 6^). — Dpi-ir;'] cf.
I Ch. 323.— n^an] ($, B, in^3.— njp'^N] cf. i Ch. 68.— iScn njc-c] nj-c
governing another noun in cstr. st., Ew. § 287 /.
8-15. The return of the captives. — A good example of Mid-
rash. — 8. Two hundred thousand, w'omen, sons, and daughters] the
men are assumed to have been slain (cf. v. « Nu. 31'- ^). — 9. But
a prophet of Yahweh was there]. For similar intervention of
prophets cf. 12^ 15' 20". — Oded]. Since the name means "re-
storer" it may have been suggested by the incident, yet the same
name appears of a prophet or a prophet's father in 15'- « f. — On
account of the wrath of Yahweh the God of your fathers against
Judah he hath delivered them into your hand]. Therefore this
victory was not due to Israel's prowess or an evidence of the
righteousness of their cause, and hence also Judah should have
been treated with restraint instead of with rage which hath reached
up to heaven, i.e., to God, and thus commanded his attention and
rendered Israel liable to punishment.— 10. The purpose also of
XXVm. 1-27.] REIGN OF AHAZ 459
enslaving the people of Judah is most severely condemned. —
Are there not surely with you, you even, trespassers against Yahweh
your God?]. The writer had probably in mind the guilt of the
defection of the N. kingdom, especially in worship (r/. 13^ «•),
hence they should not incur additional guilt by enslaving their
brethren. One Hebrew might hold another in bondage for a
limited period (cf. Ex. 212 «■ Lv. 25=9-" Dt. iS'^'O, but such
wholesale slavery of fellow-countrymen by reprisal in war was never
contemplated. — 15. The city of palm trees] an alternative name
of Jericho (cf. Dt. 34^ Ju. i'= 3''). — Beside their brethren]. Jericho,
it is assumed, belonged to the N. kingdom but was in close prox-
imity to the territory of the southern.
8. D^-iNc] (S^A TpicLKocrlas. — 9. jjun w^wh t; fij;i2] relative omitted, v.
1. 120, also cf. Koe. iii. § 361b. — S ny] unto, as far as to, for earlier n>',
Dav. Syn. § loi R. i (b). — 10. sra^S . . . d'^iimt'I min> ^ja] obj.
before the inf., a pure Aram, usage found occasionally in Heb., cf. 31'
36" (?) Lv. 199 21=' Dt. 2856 2 S. ii'9 Is. 49«, Ges. § 142/ n. 2. — tt-asS]
cf Je. 34"- '^ Ne. 5^. — DDcyonN] anx strengthens the pronom. suf. 03,
Koe. iii. § 19, the position of the pron. in front rare, cf. Ec. 2'5 Gn. 49',
Ew. §311 a. — 13. njn](S+ 7r/36s ^/xas.^tiN] three MSS., B + nin^; (g'^'^ also
+ Kvi}iov QeoO. — 15. npj] always followed by niDCO, designated by name,
cf. I Ch. 1232. — 2n'2V^ t] tfi<^^'>' nakedness, cf. BDB. -\r; II. — aiSyjM] a
denom. from Spj, sandal, cf. Ez. 161° (Qal) f-— ''Ji'i^^'^s^ Ew. § 310 a.
— ^sa] in proximity to, beside, used after a verb of motion only in late
writings, c/". Dn. 8' '^
16-21. The intervention of the King of Assyria. — Accord-
ing to 2 K. 16' Ahaz sought the assistance of Tiglath-pileser III
against the combined attack of the Kings of Syria and Israel, and
this corresponds to the actual historical situation, but the Chroni-
cler's narrative of the return of captives destroys the need for such
an intervention or aid at least against Israel, hence the Chronicler
introduces as the cause of this application for help the Edomite
and Philistine invasions.
The Edomite invasion, however, and such an order of events are
suggested by the mention of the Edomite capture of Elath (2 K. i6«
according to the true reading RVm.) in the verse immediately preceding
the statement that Ahaz invoked the aid of Tiglath-pileser.
46o 2 CHRONICLES
16. At that time] i.e., the time of the disasters from Syria and
Israel, a chronology derived from 2 K. — The king* of Assyria].
Tiglath-pileser III. — 17. For again] either with reference to the
former attacks of the Edomites (cf. 21 ^ «■) or with the meaning of
"besides," "moreover," i.e., in addition to the attacks of the
Syrians and the N. kingdom (Ke., Zoe.). That Judah suffered at
this time a loss of territory through the encroachments of Philistines
as well as Edomites is not unlikely, yet no mention of such a fact
appears in 2 K. or in Is. — 18. Beth-sh ernes h]. Cf. i Ch. 6" '^g), —
Aijalon]. Cf. i Ch. 6^^ ("). — Gederofh] (Jos. 15^' f) mod. Katra,
south-west from Jabneh. — Soco]. Cf. 11". — Timnah] mod. Tibne,
near Beth-shemesh. — Gimzo] mod. Jimzu, three miles south-
east of Lydda. — 19. King of Israel] equivalent to King of
Judah, cf. iv 126 198 2V- \ The same usage appears in v. ". —
He acted without restraint] i.e., in irreligion or idolatry. — 20. Came
unto him] in a hostile sense (Be., Ke.), yet this is not necessarily
implied by the Heb. — And distressed him and did not strengthen
him]. Tiglath-pileser is thus represented as having come to Ju-
dah, not as a deliverer, but as an oppressor and exacter of tribute,
taking even the treasures of the Temple and palace (v. ^i). The
narrative of 2 K. and the Assy. ins. know of no such advent of
Tiglath-pileser in Judah, and it is not at all probable that either
he (Ke.) or a detachment of his army (Oe.) entered Judah. — 21.
For Ahaz plundered the house of Yahweh, etc.] an adaptation
and wrong setting of 2 K. i6^ An adjustment has been sought by
a pluperfect rendering — For Ahaz had plundered, etc. (Ke., Zoe.,
Oe.), but the Chronicler's meaning is clearly different. He con-
nects this plundering the Temple with an oppression of the Assyr-
ian and not with a gift to secure his help (Bn.). — But it helped him
not]. Tiglath-pileser continued his oppression. The gift, accord-
ing to 2 K. 169, did help Ahaz in securing the intervention of the
Assyrians, who attacked the kingdoms of Damascus and northern
Israel, and removed Judah's danger from that quarter, but the
Chronicler recognised nothing of this. Ke. and Oe. reconcile this
statement with 2 K. by the interpretation that " It did not really
help him," since thereby Tiglath-pileser only strengthened himself
and made use of his power to oppress Ahaz.
XXVm. 1-27.] REIGN OF AHAZ 461
16. ^d'-'i:] one MS., Vrss., and 2 K. 16' sg. and so Be., Oe., Ki. SBOT.,
Bn., but from pi. in 32^ Ki. in Kom. expresses doubt. — 17. iii'i] either
and again or afid besides. — 18. mriija tni njcn nx] wanting in (8",
doubtless by homoeoteleuton. — 19. Snib'''] (S, U, g> mini and so Bn.,
but M is supported by the use of Ss'-ia" elsewhere, for Judah {v. s.). —
ynon] acted without restraint. The verb has this force only here.
Wanting in (&. — "^U'^i] inf. abs. continuing a finite verb, Ges. § 1 132, Koe.
iii. § 2i8b.— 20. mSn] twenty mss., 05*1-, S>, nSjn, cf. i Ch. 56- 26.— ■>dn:'?d]
one MS., ^BL^ §, ipws'i^B, f/. I Ch. 5^ -^ — iprn] not elsewhere trans. Better
point Pi. ipin, so Oe., Ki. BH., Koe. iii. § 2ioe. — 21. pVn] divided, i.e.,
plundered, only here in this sense, cf. Be.
22-25. The idolatry of Ahaz.— Based upon 2 K. 16'°-", but
with entire reconstruction of narrative (v.s.). — 22. And in the time
of his distress] i.e., when Tiglath-pileser distressed him (v. ="), but
V. " suggests the distress of the Syrian invasion. Ki. follows (|
and connects with preceding verse (v. i.). — 23. For he sacrificed
unto the gods of Damascus]. The basis of this statement is the
erection of an altar patterned after one in Damascus (2 K. 16'"'=)
{v. s.). — The gods of the kings of Syria helped them]. Historically,
since Damascus fell before Tiglath-pileser in 732 B.C., the reference
can only be to Syria's short-lived successes against Judah {cf. v. ^),
but the reference fits in badly. Ba. reads "the gods of the kings
of Assyria," which would fit the historical conditions better, but
those gods were not the gods of Damascus. It is simpler to think
of confusion on the part of the Chronicler. — 24. And Ahaz
gathered together, etc.]. These statements rest upon 2 K. 16" '•,
which the Chronicler has interpreted in his own way {v. s.). He
saves the sanctity of the Temple by having Ahaz' idolatries out-
side of its precincts, as though he had abandoned altogether the
worship of Yahweh. In reality Ahaz introduced innovations in
the Temple worship, which he seems to have assiduously culti-
vated. There is no reason, then, to think that the Temple was
closed during his reign.
22. iS -ixn ny3i] (S dXX' ^ tQ dXi^^vai airdv and joined to v. 2'.
This Ki. follows and renders iS r\-yi^ dn 'D {SBOT., Kom., but not BH.),
also HWB.^', BDB. — f\oi^:] impf. consec. after a determination of time
Dr. TH. 127 (^), Koe. iii. § 366I. — ?nN iSnn xin] a late usage of the
pronoun prefixed to the proper name for emphasis (BDB. p. 215 e):
462 2 CHRONICLES
"that king Ahaz " the suhj. of '\DV'\. (& /cat e'lirtv 6 ^aaiXevs, read-
ing icN for inx — 23 . naiM] (S^a cKi^rjrrjffo} {<6^ fijT-^o-w) =■ lyi-tN a verb
common in Ch. — pa'Dit] cf. i Ch. iS^. — ■•j'^n] i MS. and (& i^v, cf. v. '6.
Here the pi. is certainly in place. — D''-».ti;c] read Qal wy^n, D due to
dittography, Ges. § 530, BDB. — 24. D^nSN-n'] (6 Kvpiov. — .-1^3 >S3 pn^
D''n'?Nn] (g ai}rd, B omits. — D'^m^a] wanting in (S^, but its presence in
<6 is testified by B""^. a._25. i^jji n^y '^oa] r/. 11'= Est. 2" 4^ 8"- 's- 1', Koe.
iii. § 90. — rr^x . . . D•;2^<^] <8 pi.
26. 27. The conclusion of Ahaz' reign. — Taken with vari-
ations from 2 K. 18"-=°. — 26. Book of the kings of Jiidah and
Israel]. Cf. Intro, p. 22. — And was buried in tlie city even in
Jerusalem ; and they brought him not into the sepulchres of the
kings of Israel]. Thus, according to the Chronicler, Ahaz was
dishonoured for his wickedness by not being buried in the royal
tombs. This is an intentional departure from the text of 2 K.
i6-°, which says " [Ahaz] was buried with his fathers in the city
of David." For other similar departures cf. 2r-'> 24" 26-^
27. in-jnpM] (5, 2 K. 1620 -\3-i-j and 2 K. + T'P3n D}\ — nSa'n^a nv^] (S,
2 K. in -\^-;2. — in^ptn^] 2 K. in^ptn. The former is usual in Ch., i Ch.
4''i 2 Ch. 28" + 35 t. 2 Ch. 29-33 also 2 K. 201" Je. 15^ Is. 1' (and
n^iin'') Ho. i' Mi. i' (but in last three ■> may be text, error for i); the
latter more common in 2 K. and elsewhere, 2 K. 1620 18' + 34 t. (2 K.
18-21) Is. 361 + 31 t. (Is. 36-39) Je. 261s. 19 I Ch. 313 2 Ch. 29'8 " 302^
32", (and nipTn) 2 K. i8' + 6 t. Pr. 25'. Assy, inscrip. Hazaki{i)au
COT. on 2K. i8i-ff-.
XXIX-XXXII. The reign of Hezekiah (r. 715-686 ? b.c).
— Hezekiah, according to 2 K., was a reformer in religious worship,
removing the high places and the brazen serpent which had been
worshipped (2 K. 18^), and likewise he was marked for his devotion
to Yahweh and adherence to the commandments of Moses (2 K.
185 '). He thus became a fruitful subject for the Chronicler, who
describes at length his reopening of the Temple (c. 29), his celebra-
tion of the Passover (c. 30), and his appointment of the servitors
of the Temple (c. 31). All of these acts are treated from the point
of view of the Chronicler's own time and without the evidence of
the use of historical records.
XXIX. The reopening of the Temple.
XXIX. 1-36.] HEZEKIAH'S REOPENING OF TEMPLE 463
Sources: According to Ki. (after Bn.), vv. '• - are from 2 K., vv. 3-24 M;
vv. »-"' the Chronicler; vv. ^'-'^ M; vv. ^s-" are assigned to the Chronicler
because they emphasise the activity of the Levites in the service of music
and song. Bn. calls attention to the divine command for the service (v. ^)
and also the command (v. ^s) and instruments of David (v. -^), the words of
David and of Asaph the seer (v. ^o) (r/. i Ch. 15" 255, where Heman is
called a seer, 2 Ch. 35'^, where Jeduthun is also so called). While the in-
troduction of the Levitical singers is emphasised, yet there is no such
abruptness as implies an author ditTerent from that of the remainder
of the chapter. Considering the chapter as a whole, the connection
between v. ^ and 28-^ shows that both chapters 29 and 28 are in all
probability by the same author — in all likelihood the Chronicler. The
marks of the Chronicler in the vv. 3-2^ 31.36 (assigned to M) are as follows:
In V. 5 ^ji;--;- (1. 115); in v. « Syn (1. 68); in v. 'b (i. 117 h); in vv. '^-u
the list of Levites; in vv. >«• " Sap (1. 103); in v. '^ n':-n (1. 30), ma'^o
(1. 67), '^;3 (1. 68); in v. 2' ->!:^f (1. 4); in v. =' T' i^^-a (1. 65); in v. ^s
3-1'? (1. 105), mn>- (1. 81).
1. 2. Hezekiah's accession.— Taken from 2 K. 18'=, with the
omission of the synchronism with Hoshea King of Israel (2 K. 18').
3-11. The command to open the Temple.— With the rest of
the chapter, from the Chronicler. The whole narrative is largely,
if not entirely, imaginary, since in reality the Temple was not closed
during the reign of Ahaz {y. comment on 28=^). Yet this cleansing
of the Temple has been taken as historical, meaning a rebuilding
of the Temple (Winckler, KAT.^ p. 272) {cf. note on Millo 32^.—
3. In the first month] i.e., of the sacred year, viz., Nisan (cf. 30- '■).
Hezekiah is assumed to have come to the throne shortly before this
(cf. v. 1'). — Opened the doors, etc.] a summary of that which was
accomplished during the first month. — 4. Into the broad place on
the east]. This locality must be sought in the topography of the
period of the Chronicler. The assembly of the priests and Levites
suggests the inner court of the Temple (so Be., Bn.), but the term
is used for an open space outside the precincts of the Temple
extending to the water-gate, where the people were wont to assem-
ble (cf. Ezr. 10' Ne. 3" 8'- '• 's), and since the Temple was regarded
as closed and neglected the Chronicler may well have placed the
assembly there. — 5. Sanctify yourselves]. Cf v. '^ i Ch. i5'-- ".
— And sanctify the house of Yahweh] as was accomplished by
its cleansing and through the offerings and services described in this
464 2 CHRONICLES
chapter. — The filtkiness] (mjn) often used of menstruation and
hence a very strung term for impurity {v. BDB.); scarcely here the
abominations of idolatry, i.e., utensils connected with idolatrous
worship (the view of Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.), since the Temple was
supposedly closed, but the accumulated filth from its neglect.
Cf. uncleanness (nN!2tDn) v. ^\—From the holy place] (t^-tpD)
from the entire Temple area {cf. holy place (t^lp) in v. '). — 6. Our
fathers], Ahaz and his contemporaries, since v. ' suits these only.
— And they have turned their faces from the dwelling place of Yah-
weh and have given him the back]. These words are figurative,
meaning they have ceased to worship Yahweh in his Temple (cf.
Je. 2" 32'^). — 7. Also they have shut up the doors of the porch, etc.].
According to 28-", Ahaz had closed the Temple and naturally all
the Temple worship of Yahweh ceased also. This is quite contrary
to the facts narrated in 2 K. i6>''-'% where Ahaz is represented as
modifying the ancient ritual, but where are no indications of a
cessation of the worship of Yahweh, but quite the reverse. On the
lamps, incense and burnt-offerings, cf 13".— 8. And the wrath of
Yahweh was against Judah and Jerusalem]. Cf. 241' 32^5. This
vtrath was seen in the disaster which befell Judah during the reign
of Ahaz, recorded in c. 28 (cf. 28").—^ terror] i.e., a terrifying
spectacle; the word is used in Dt. 28^5 Ez. 23" and also in Je. 15'
24' 34" and 29'8 with reference to the impending exile of Judah.
In the last passage it is joined as here with astonishment and
hissing, which also occur in Je. 25'. — As you see with your eyes].
The disasters are meant which befell, according to c. 28, the peo-
ple under Ahaz, through the wars with the Syrians, Ephraimitcs,
Philistines. Edomites, and the oppression of the Assyrians.—
10. Now it is in my heart]. Cf. i Ch. 22'. — To make a covenant
with Yahweh] i.e., to pledge oneself to keep the law of Yahweh
(cf 15'- 23'« 34^' 2 K. 23'). — 11. For Yahweh hath chosen you,
etc.]. Cf. Dt. 10 », also Nu. y Sk
I. ^7\>pm■>] 2 K. 18' n^rn v. 28".— 3. idSc'? njni'xin njco xin] O^ba
Kal iydvero wj {^ i^vlKa) eartj (^ + 'Efe/c(as) iirl ttjs ^affiXelas avrov.
— 5. tt'-ipn] lit. the sacredness, here and not infrequently applied to
the Temple and its precincts, v. BDB. cnp 2. d.— 6. ir;i] pf. with
weak waw. — iJ'n':'N] wanting in S"*. — niy ljn>i] iv only here with
XXIX. 1-36.] HEZEKIAH'S REOPENING OF TEMPLE 465
jpj; with njD in fig. of apostasy Je. 2" 32". On omission of art., Ew.
§ 27S d. — 7. D':'i>sn] (^ rod vaov. — nSy] used collectively, and so generally
through this chapter.— 8. n;;i!] Kt. cf. Is. 28''; Qr. mjn. The same
variation appears in Je. is-" 243 2918 34'% but Kt. njiv in Dt. 28^5
Ez. 23" t- — ^-^''^] wanting in 05'^. — 9. ijinnx] i ms., (6^^ o?;. — and
so ^B* throughout the verse. This alteration is intentional, since
Hezekiah's father did not die by the sword, nor could his sons, daugh-
ters, or wives be said to have been carried into captivity. Verb is
omitted (1. 117 b). — ^xcz] <& + it> yy ovk avrGiv = anS nS i^ino ((S^^
+ 6 Kal vvv icTTiv). — -pxi '7j;] <& joins with v. '". — 10. laaS Djj] cf. i Ch.
22'. — T.rn] weak 1 with juss. to express design or purpose. Dr. TH.
60, Ges. § 165a. — 11. 'J3] wanting in d. — iSc-n] Niph. impf. juss.
1/ n-'Z' be quiet, hence be (not) negligent, Niph. only here. — r\y7\>'\
wanting in (&^.
12-19. The cleansing of the Temple. — In response to the
King's exhortation, fourteen Levites at once come forward, two
each representing the three great Levitical famihes Kehath, Merari,
and Gershon {cf. 1 Ch. 6' <"=>), two the family of Elizaphan (cf. i Ch.
i5», where the family is also co-ordinated with Kehath, Merari,
and Gershon), and two each the three divisions of singers Asaph,
Heman, and J editthiin (cf. i Ch. 25'), and under their direction
the Temple is cleansed. — 12. Mahath the son of \4masai] also
in the genealogy of the Kehathite Samuel (i Ch. 6^° <"> q. v., cf.
also 31", where Mahath again appears). — Jo'elthe son of'Azariah]
likewise in the genealogy just mentioned (i Ch. 6^' (36))_ — Kish the
son of'Abdi] also in the genealogy of the Merarite Ethan (i Ch.
6" (44' written Kishi).— '^zana/z]. Cf. 31'^ where he would seem
to have been appointed ruler of the Temple. — JehalleVel'] not
elsewhere among the lists of Levites, but the name of a man of
Judah (i Ch. 4'**). — Jo\-ih the son of Zimmah] in the fragmentary
genealogy of a descendant of Gershon probably Asaph (i Ch.
6^ f. (20 f.) q_ v.).— Eden]. Cf. 31'^ f.— 13. Shimri]. Cf i Ch.
26'° a Levite, 4" the name of a Simeonite, 11" a father of one
of David's heroes +. — Jeu'el or Je'i'el] a frequent Levitical name
but not elsewhere connected with Elizaphan. — Zechariah and
Mattaniah]. Both of these names occur elsewhere among Asaph-
ites. For the former, cf. 2 Ch. 2o''' Ne. 12^5. 4i^ for the latter
Ne. II" 2 Ch. 20". — 14. Jchu'el f ]. — Shim'ei] a frequent Levitical
30
466 2 CHRONICLES
name but not elsewhere connected with Heman. — Shema'iah] a
very frequent name; also that of a descendant of Jeduthun in
I Ch. 9'«. — 'Uzzi'el] a Levitical clan name (cf. i Ch. 15'"), also
not infrequent of individuals, a Hemanite musician in i Ch. 25^ —
15. And sanctified themselves]. Cf.v.^i Ch. i5'2- ". — By the words
of Yahweh] i.e., according to divine appointment either because
the King's command was agreeable to the law (Be., Ke., Zoe. ) or
given at the instigation of a prophet (a suggestion of Ba. and un-
likely), or an example of h3'postatisation, the pi. being used where
the sing, might be expected {cf. 30'=). — 16. And the priests went
in unto the inner part of the house of Yahweh] i.e., into the Temple
proper, the holy place and the most holy place without distinction,
where only the priests were allowed to enter. — All the uncleanness].
Cf. V. K — And the Levites took it\ Thus the work of cleansing the
Temple was divided between the priests and the Levites. — To the
brook Kidron] on the east of the city. The place was regarded as
unclean, cf. 15". — 17. On the first of the first month] i.e., the first of
Nisan (cf. v. ^). — To sanctify] i.e., to cleanse. — And on the eighth
day came they to the porch of Yahweh]. Eight days were consumed
in cleansing the Temple courts, and then eight more in cleansing the
Temple building, hence On the sixteenth day of the first month they
finished their work.— 18. And then they came within unto Hezekiah
the king] i.e., within the palace. — And the table of show bread].
In 4" and i Ch. 28'^ tables are mentioned {cf. also 4' ' ). — 19. All
the vessels which king Ahaz in his reign had rejected in his trespass
have we prepared and sanctified]. The reference is to the vessels
described in 28=^ {q. v.) as "cut in pieces." Ke. and Zoe. refer
directly to 2 K. i6'^- ", and think of the brazen altar of burnt-
offering, the brazen sea and the lavers. Be. and Oe. refer likewise
to 2 K. 16" ". It is not impossible that the author had these in
mind; then we may render set up and sanctified (Ba.). — And behold
they are before the altar of Yahweh] the altar of burnt-offering in
the court. This favours the reference to lavers which with the
altar were in the court.
On the other hand it must be remembered that the writer was drawing
largely upon his imagination, and evidently cared little about accuracy
of detail, or making his account especially consistent either with his own
previous narrative or, much less, with that of 2 K.
XXIX. 1-36.] HEZEKIAH'S REOPENING OF TEMPLE 467
12. in'-\7>* (bis)] (B^^ Zaxap'oii(as) = in^ijiT. — '•jr-ijn |ri] (^ Kal dwo
tQv vICjv TeSffuvel. — ps] 05^^ qItoi viol. — 13. Sni;m] Kt. but Qr., 05, B, ®
''};m_ — 14. '?N-in\] Kt.; Qr., (B, M, QI '''n\ — 15. nin'> no nnaV] wanting in
(S^. — 16. ns'Jij] towards the inside, lii.faceward, cf. v. '* 2 K. 7" Ez. 41'.
- — 17. njr'i' av3i] cardinal used instead of ordinal and Dr given; this
latter a late usage, Ges. § 134/'. — d'^in'^] 05 rbv vabv, cf. v. '. — '"i" a^D^S]
S indicating length of time, Koe. iii. § 33 if.
20-36. The renewal of worship in the Temple. — On the
day after the completion of the Temple, the King and the princes
early in the morning presented a sevenfold sacrifice of bullocks,
rams, lambs, and he-goats as a burnt-offering and a sin-offering for
the royal house, the sanctuary {i.e., the priests and Levites), and
the people generally (vv. 20-2^). This service was accompanied with
one of song rendered by the Levites (vv. 25-30). Then followed gifts
of free-will offerings (vv. si-ss). — 20. And he assembled the officials
of the city] as was customary on state occasions. — 21. The seven
bullocks, rams, and lambs were for a burnt-offering (cf. v. -^), while
the seven he-goats were for a sin-offering (cf. v. 23); combined to-
gether they were an offering completing the purification of the
Temple and its rededication. The burnt-offering was a petition for
acceptance and reconciliation or atonement with Yahweh (Lv.
j3 f. J420 1624). It was not necessarily connected with any par-
ticular form of transgression, but served to express worship in
general and to atone, give a covering, for general sinfulness. The
sin-offering, on the other hand, was expressly for this latter pur-
pose and for specific sins. In Ezekiel it is prescribed for the dedi-
cation of the altar (43'^ « ), the annual cleansing of the sanctuary
(45""'0> the consecration of a prince and the people on festive
occasions (4522 (■), and for the return of a priest to duty after
purification (44"). In P it was prescribed for the covering of
minor offences (cf. Lv. 4^- ^^- " 5' "• 126- «). Seven victims were
offered because seven was a sacred number (cf. for other sacrifices
of sevens Nu. 28" «• Ez. 45"). — For the kingdom and for the
sanctuary and for Judah] i.e., for the royal house, for the priests,
and for the people generally. — 22. And the priests received the
blood and threw it (from a bowl) against the altar] according to
the ritual of the burnt-offering (cf. Ex. 29'« Lv. i^- ")■ — 23. And
they (the King and the representatives of the assembly) laid their
468 2 CHRONICLES
hands upon them] according to the ritual of the sin-offering
(r/. Lv. 4<- '«). This ceremony is also prescribed in the case of the
burnt-offering (Lv. i'), but is mentioned here to emphasise the sin-
offering. — 24. With their blood upon the altar]. The blood of the
sin-offering was manipulated differently from that of the burnt-
offering. It was placed upon the horns of the altar of burnt-
offering and poured at its base (Lv. 4"- 34). — To make atonement]
lit. to cover over, a technical expression. Through the sacrifice
a covering was secured so that guilt was no longer seen, but blotted
out; and thus was hidden the sin of the neglect of the sanctuary
and the failure to worship Yahweh. — For all Israel] not only
the members of the S. kingdom, but of all the twelve tribes (c/.
30*) whose remnants were still in Palestine. — 25. With cymbals,
etc.]. Cf. I Ch. i5i«. — According to the commandment of David].
Cf. 8'^ — And of Gad the king's seer and Nathan the prophet]. Cf.
I Ch. 29". Neither Gad nor Nathan is mentioned elsewhere in
connection with the music or songs of the Temple.— For by the hand
of Yahweh was the command by the hand of Ins prophets] i.e., Yah-
weh had commanded David through his prophets, presumably Gad
and Nathan, to arrange the praise services of the Temple. — 26.
With the instruments of David]. Cf. i Ch. 23^. The instruments
of V. 25 are evidently meant. — Arid the priests with the trumpet.?].
The blowing of the trumpets fell to the priests (cf. 5'= i Ch. 15"
i6«). — 27. 28. During the offering of the burnt-offering until it
was ended the whole congregation stood worshipping, and the song
of the Levites accompanied with the music of the stringed instru-
ments and the trumpet-blowing of the priests continued (Ke.). —
30. A supplementary service is not meant, but the writer calls
attention to the fact that the songs of the Levites were the words
of David and Asaph the seer, meaning without doubt psalms such
as were being collected in his own time into the Hebrew Psalter;
and he wishes also to emphasise the joyful and worshipful de-
meanour of the Levites. — And they bowed down and worsliipped]
probably only a concluding ceremony (so Ke.).
31. Then Hezekiah answered] responded to the services of
sacrifice and song. — Now ye have consecrated yourselves unto
Yahweh] addressed to the priests and Levites who through the
XXIX. 1-36.] HEZEKI.'VH'S REOPENING OF TEMPLE 469
ceremonies just performed had been reconsecrated to the ser-
vice of Yahweh. — Sacrifices and thank-qferings] (nmm DTI^T
the T is epexegetical) i.e., sacrifices which were thank-offerings.
The first term is generic. The thank-offering was a sacrifice
offered for some special benefit received; here an expression of joy
over the renewal of the worship of Yahweh in the Temple (for
ritual cf. Lv. 7'= ^ ). These sacrifices, with the exception of the
fat which was burnt on the altar and the breast and right thigh,
which fell to the priests, were eaten by the offerer and thus were an
occasion of a festive meal. In the case of the burnt-offering and
sin-offering the offerer received nothing for his own use (the former
was burnt entire and the unburnt portions of the latter belonged
to the priests). Hence the burnt-offerings from the assembly are
mentioned as given by everyone of willing heart. They were a
greater evidence of unselfish piety than the thank-offerings. — 33.
And the consecrated things] (D*'tnp) i-e., the sacrifices, the thank-
offerings (y. i.). — Six hundred oxen and three hundred sheep].
Since these were thank-offerings, they were eaten by the people.
— 34. But the priests were too few, so that they could not flay all the
burnt-offerings, wherefore their brethren the Levites did help them].
This latter statement is strange in view of Lv. i'^ '-, where the killing
and flaying the burnt-offering is the duty of the offerer, i.e., one
of the laity. The writer here, however, regards the flaying as the
duty of the priests in which the Levites might assist, either because
these were public offerings presented in the name of community
(Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.), or because this marks an intermediate stage
in the development of the cultus. (The Talmudic literature assigns
the slaughter to the priests.) (Bn.) — For the Levites were more up-
right in heart to sanctify themselves than the priests]. This judg-
ment is either a reflexion of the Chronicler's personal bias for the
Levites at the expense of the priests (hence Bn. assigns vv. '^ 'to
the Chronicler in distinction from his Midrash source), or was
inferred from the record of the subserviency of the priest Urijah to
Ahaz (2 K. 16'^), as though the priests had been more in the
idolatrous movement of Ahaz than the Levites (Ki.). This is
accepted as the fact, as it may have been, by Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.
— 35. And also the burnt-offerings were in abundance, with the fat
47© 2 CHRONICLES
of the peace-offerings, and with the drink-offerings for the burnt-offer-
ings]. Another reason why the Levites helped the priests in the flay-
ing of the victims was because the priests besides attending to the
proper altar service (the sprinkling of the blood and burning of the
sacrilices upon the altar) were obliged to bum the fat of the peace-
offerings and manipulate the drink-offerings. The peace-offerings
were the thank-offerings (v. s'). The drink-offerings were of wine
and probably poured like the blood at the base of the altar (cf.
Nu. 15'-'^ V. Gray in loco; WRS. Rln. of the Semites, p. 230). — And
the service of the house of Yahweh was established]. Everything
necessary for the cleansing and rededication of the Temple was
accomplished (Be.); better the regular cultus of the Temple was
re-established (Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba.). — 36. Because of that which God
had established for the people] i.e., the restoration of the Temple
worship, which is regarded as a divine benefaction. — For the thing
happened suddenly]. This change from apostasy to loyalty to
Yahweh took place almost immediately on Hezekiah's accession to
the throne {cf. v. '). It was a common impulse of both King and
people, apparently without any preparation. This, too, then was a
ground of great joy.
21. anjj iT'flS] -T-flS he-goat is a late Heb. word abs. Dn. S^- =1. cstr. sg.
with Dvyn Dn. 8^- « (fig. of Alex.), pi. (lit.) here and Ezr. 8^5 (n^sx
HNtan) f. — n3'?cDn] Bn. regarding kingdom as synonymous with Judah
reads iSdh. Ki. translates " konigliche Regerung." — n-nni] (^ luparik
possibly with the thought that Judah had been expressed under r^j
PaffiKelas, i.e. na'^cn. — -\nx''i] and he commanded {cf. vv. -''■ '», 1. 4). —
23. Tiyi'] the usual word for the he-goat of the sin-offering (cf. Ez. 43^5
Lv. 9'5 4- 9 t. Lv. Nu. V. BDB.). — 24. inohm] and they made a sin
offering, cf. Ex. 293* Lv. 6^^ 9"5.— 25. nMi] (6, U + iScn.— nrn] (gs
Tov Trpo<priTov. — "l^sn] wanting in (S", H. — 27. hnn nj?3] retrospective
word suppressed, cf. 20- 24", Ges. § 155/. — ''"'^ H"'] (& Trpos. 1 with
epexegetical force, Dav. Synt. § 136 R. i (c), Koe. iii. § 375c. — 28.
D'^n-ii-nn] cf. i Ch. 1$^, I. 44.— 30. 'V SSnS] only inf. and pt. of SSn
are followed by *?, Koe. iii. p. 274 n. 2. — '-•nrin in'3m] collective with pi., a
frequent construction, Koe. iii. 346 e /3. — 33. a^'inpn] cf 35'' Ne. lO'"
Nu. iS" Ez. 3638.-36. ]'2nn] the art. as rel., see Dav. Synt. § 22 R. 4,
Ges. § 138?, Koe. iii. § 52c, 1. 119.
XXX. The celebration of the Passover. — Nothing of this
event is mentioned in 2 K., and as here described it is probably
XXX. 1-27.] CELEBRATION OF PASSOVER 47 1
a purely imaginary occurrence, suggested by the Passover under
Josiah (2 K. 23=')- Since Hezekiah was held to have been a
reformer equally with Josiah, it was felt he too must have cele-
brated in a similar manner the Passover.
The chapter is assigned by Ki. Kom. (after Bn.) to M^ except w. 21b. 22
{and the Levites, etc.), which, from the reference to the musical service
of the Levites, are assigned to the Chronicler. M- is given as a source
instead of M, because to the latter is assigned the description of the
celebration of the Passover under Josiah (c. 35), which in v. '* (cf. 2 K.
23-" ) seemingly forbids a similar celebration under Hezekiah. This
description here appears also an imitation of the other, with an endeavour
to surpass it. In both the Levites have prominence (cf. vv. '^ ^- with
35^ ^); the King and officials provide the animals for the Passover (of.
V. 21 with 35^ ^■); with the Passover other offerings are brought (cf.
V. ■* with 35'-); and the celebrations surpass also any since Solomon
(cf. V. -^ with 35"). The celebration under Hezekiah also surpasses
that under Josiah, since this latter was for the Judeans only, but the
former for all Israel and strangers (vv. ' ^■); the latter lasted only a week
(35"), but the former two weeks (v. 23). Thus while both descriptions
may have been in the same Midrashic source, it is argued that they
were not from the same author (Bn.). Yet it is doubtful, however,
whether both narratives in 2 Ch. may not have been written by the
Chronicler under the influence of the current views of both of these cele-
brations. The following are the marks of the Chronicler's style, omit-
ting vv. 21 b- 22; in vv. '• 5 nnjN (1. 2); in v. ^ ic;; Hiph. (1. 90); in v. '
h-;T2 (1. 68); in v. » ti pi (1. 78); in vv. '• i^b omission of the verb (1.
117 b); in V. '» J>'^ (1. 63); in v. " 5?JD (1. 56); in v. '« isy Sj; nny (1. 91);
in w. '8b. 19 rel. omitted (1. 120); in v. >9 pon (1. 54) and trm'? (1. 23);
in v. 2'^ (to Levites) nss (1. 69) av3 av (1. 48); in v. 2« 'i nnr:-^ (1. 109).
1-12. The invitation to the Passover. — 1. All Israel] the
people of the N. kingdom. — And also letters he wrote to Ephraim
and Manasseh] is added to avoid misunderstanding the meaning
of Israel. Ephraim and Manasseh are mentioned not as tribes,
but as representatives of Israel. This invitation presupposes
the Dtic. law. It is very difficult, if not impossible, also to
conceive of Hezekiah as having historically sent such an invita-
tion to the inhabitants of the semi-hostile N. kingdom at the com-
nencement of his reign before the fall of Samaria {v. following
verse).— 2. To keep the passover in the second month]. The law
472 2 CHRONICLES
(of P) provided that persons unable to keep the Passover in the
first month should celebrate it in the second month (c/.Nu. q'-'^).
The whole connection shows that the writer designed this month to be
the second month of the first year of Hezekiah's reign (so Be., Zoe., Oe.,
Ba.). Cf. the use of i consec. in nSirii v. '; the contrast between the
second month and " the first month " in 293- "; and the statement of v. '
respecting the priests, which is to be connected with the account of cleans-
ing the Temple, which was not finished until the i6th of the first month
(29'') {v. i.). Ke., on the other hand, feeling the historical improbability
of the invitation being given while the N. kingdom was standing, and
especially in view of the implication of the captivity of Israel given in
V. ' and the destruction of the high places in Ephraim and Manasseh
mentioned in 31', held that this Passover took place after the fall of
Samaria in the sixth year of Hezekiah. But here, as elsewhere, the
Chronicler is not troubled by historical inconsistencies.
3. For they had not been able to keep it at that time {i.e., on the
14th of Nisan, the first month) because the priests had not sanctified
themselves in a sufficient number and the people had not assembled
together in Jerusalem]. The regular time for the celebration of the
Passover was on the 14th of Nisan, the first month, but at that
time (according to 29") the cleansing of the Temple had not been
finished, and hence it might rightly be assumed that many priests
remained unsanctified (v. also 29'^). The priests also are held
to be slack in entering into the renewal of the worship of Yahweh
(cf. V. '5 29=^). The celebration then of the Passover under those
conditions was not feasible, and until the Temple was ready for
worship, the people naturally would not have been summoned to
Jerusalem. This apparently was the view of the writer, and the
occasion of the statements of this verse. — 4. All the assefnbly]
that of Jerusalem {cf. v. 2). — 5. From Be^er-sheba' unto Dan] the
limits of the undivided kingdom of David and Solomon {cf. i Ch.
21''). The existence of the N. kingdom was either ignored or more
probably the writer assumed that it had already fallen {cf. v. ^).-^
For they had not done in great numbers according to that which had
been written]. Only a few hitherto had observed the Passover
according to the law {v. i.). — 6. And according to the commandment
of the king]. The "and" should be omitted {v. i.). — Ye children
of Israel turn unto Yahweh the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel]
XXX. 1-27.] CELEBRATION OF PASSOVER 473
addressed to the people of the N. kingdom with the assumption
that they were apostate from Yahweh, the view of the Chronicler
{cf. 13'* 'O- — That he may return unto the escaped remnant which
are left of you from the hand of the kings of Assyria]. This state-
ment naturally presupposes the fall of the N. kingdom through
Shalmaneser and Sargon (b.c. 722-721) {cf. 2 K. i7«), although
it possibly may be satisfied by the some ten years earlier ravages
and deportations of the north and north-east frontiers of N. Israel
through Tiglath-pileser {cf. 2 K. 15" i Ch. s^^). It is not probable,
however, that the Chronicler drew at all this distinction, and it is
profitless to attempt to adjust his statements to the chronology of the
events of the reign of Hezekiah {v. s. v. "). (Indeed this chronology
was not clearly understood by the compilers of 2 K. and the book
of Isaiah, and still remains obscure.) — 7. Who trespassed against
Yahweh]. Cf. v. «. — So that he gave them to desolation]. Cf. 29*.
— As ye now see]. The disasters of the Assyrian invasion were
most recent. — 10. Even unto Zebidun] thus not to the extreme
northern border, unto Dan, as might have been expected {cf v.^).
Those more northerly sections had been ravaged and the inhab-
itants deported by Tiglath-pileser {cf. v. «) (Zoe., Oe.), a fact the
writer may possibly have borne in mind (yet cf. v. ^). — And they
were laughing them to scorn and were mocking them]. Cf. for
similar action in the S. kingdom, 36'^ — 12. By the word of Yah-
weh] understood as by the words of Yahweh (29'^ q. v.) (Be.,
Ke., Zoe.); but probably an example of the hypostatisation of the
word, i.e., the word was conceived of as an entity, almost as a me-
diating spirit between God and man {cf 29'^ i K. 13'- ^- ^- ^- "• '*• ^^
2035 I S. 3-') {cf. Smend, Alt. Rlgngesch. pp. 87, 464). This con-
ception may be regarded as a forerunner of the NT. doctrine of
the Logos.
1. pnjN] letters, sg. n-i.JK late, probably a loan-word, Assy, egirtu
(BDB.), cf. V. 6 Ne. 27- »■ ' 6=- "■ i' Est. g"-'- " ^—3. ■'ic'^] S + n:: + -1,
according to what was sufficient, i.e., in sufficient numbers (Be., Zoe.,
Oe., V. BDB. nn i. e, Ke. ad sufficientiam qualitatively with reference to
the priesthood, " many at that time not having renounced idolatry ").
— 5 . n3T iioyi] late usage of ^CJ; v. 1. 89. — Sip] proclamation, cf. 24'. —
31'^] in great numbers (Be., Ke., Zoe., Ba., Kau., Ki., Bn., RV.); for a
longtime (AV., RVm.); Meistens (Oe.). The former is preferable. —
474 2 CHRONICLES
6. 2'^-\-f] the runners, i.e., royal messengers, a late usage (cf. Je. 51"
Est. 3" "• S'o- '<). This usage is quite different from that of 12'°
(9. v.). — 7^^•\3i<] cf. V. '. — mxoDi] many mss. '31, two 'ca, and one 'C3,
so also <6, "B, followed correctly by Ki. Kom., BH. — Sn 21:'^] (^ tn 3'J"i.
that he {Yahweh) may bring back the escaped remnant. — '>oSc] <&, B, &,
have the sg. — 8. dddij; is'pn Sc<] nu'p is freq. thus used in the Hiph.
with f\-\-; {cf. 2 K. 17'* Je. 72* 17M 1915^/ al. v. BDB.). — "7n> un] lit. ^/t/e
hand to, i.e., submit to, cf. nnn T" jnj i Ch. 29** . — 9. 0"'Cn-iS] an intensive
pi. with ^7 either predicate with 03"'J31 as'nx or the obj. of a verb un-
derstood; cf. use with ]r: i K. S^oNe. 11' Dn. I'Ps. 146^^. — avi'Si] inf.
cstr. attached by \ depending upon or a continuation of the verb which
lies in o^rmS, Ges. § 114P, Dr. TH. 206.— 10. 0>">3p . . . n'n>i] the
\)t. here and in following clauses with ^^r^ used to express the idea of
duration more distinctly or to render action more vivid, a usage more
common in late style, Dav. Synt. § 100 R. 2., Ges. § ii6r. — yiNa
o^-\dn] (5 ^i* T<J5 6pei 'Eflipdiytt.— a'n'Titt'r)] Hiph. used only here. — dij^Sdi]
Hiph. late, cf. Ne. 2^^ Jb. 21' Ps. 22'; with S, see Koe. iii. § 2i2f. —
11 . lyj^J] humbled themselves Niph. of 3?J3 in reflex, sense common in
Ch., cf. 7» 126- '• '• >2 32=6 SS^-- 13- 23. 23 3427. 27 ^(,n — 12. 1313] mEHy
MSS., &, ® '^^.
13-27. The celebration of the Passover. — 13. The feast of
unleavened bread] properly a feast following the celebration of
the Passover (cf. Ex. i2'-'3 with "-=", both passages belong to P)
(Jos. Ant. iii. 5). The Passover originally was a spring festival
of nomadic life with offerings from herds, which later was given
a historical origin in connection with the E.xodus and joined with
the Feast of Unleavened Bread, originally an agricultural festival
of the opening of the harvest, but later, like the Passover, connected
with the Exodus (cf. Ex. i3«-'°). The two feasts here are practically
identified, as in the NT. Mk. 14"- '^ Lk. 22'. — In the second mo72th].
Cf. V. 2. — 14. And they arose and removed the altars which were
in Jerusalem] the unlawful ones erected by Ahaz (cf. 28^*).
The people cleansed the city as the priests had cleansed the Tem-
ple.— Even the places for incense they took away] probably a
gloss defining the altars more particularly to conform with the
mention of the burning of incense in 28^- ^^ — And cast them into
the brook Kidron]. Cf. 291^. — 15. And the priests and the Levites
were ashamed]. Again, as in v. = 29", a certain reproach is placed
upon the priests and here the Levites, as though they were not
forward in the renewal of the worship of Yahweh, but were only
XXX. 1-27.1 CELEBRATION OF PASSOVER 475
driven to it by a feeling of shame {cf. 29=') under the influence of
which they sanctified themselves. — And they brought offerings into
the house of Yahweh] as an atonement for themselves (Ba.),
better a reference to the paschal lambs (cf. 35'=) and the sacrificial
functions connected with them (v. "5) (Ke.). — 16. And they stood
in their place according to their prescribed duty according to the law
of Moses]. No specific law is here meant, but the general law
constituting the orders of the priests and Levites with their respec-
tive functions. — The priests sprinkling the blood (upon the altar)
from (he hand of the Levites]. According to Ex. i2\ all the congre-
gation slay the paschal lamb (i.e., each householder his lamb), but
on this occasion the lambs were evidently slain by the Levites,
owing to the unsanctified condition of the congregation (vv. " ' ).
Had the lambs been slain and their blood caught by persons
Levitically unclean, the expiatory sacrificial blood would have been
defiled. The same ritual was observed at the great Passover
celebrated under Josiah (35")) ^.nd for a similar reason at the
Passover celebrated after the Return, mentioned in Ezr. 6" '■. — 18.
Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun]. This list of tribes
differs from that in v. ", but in both cases the writer mentions the
tribes merely as an equivalent for the men of the N. kingdom. —
Had not cleansed themselves]. The causes of Levitical defilement
were very numerous and members of the N. kingdom, who were not
in regular connection with the priesthood and sanctuary, might
naturally be thought of as in a state of Levitical uncleanness and
thus unable lawfully to eat the Passover {cf. Nu. 9^). — 19. Yet not
according to the purification of the sanctuary] i.e., without having
complied with the laws of purification. — 20. And healed the people]
i.e., forgave them (cf. Ps. 41= '•*'> Ho. 14^ Je. 3"). This ceremonial
transgression, like other sins, is conceived of as a disease, in the
thought of its effects, to be removed by a healing remedy. Physical
sickness, or even death, may have been in the mind of the writer
{cf. Lv. 15", Be., Oe., Ba.; Ke., Zoe., reject this and think only of
spiritual results). — 21. The feast of unleavened bread]. Cf. v. ".
— With instruments of strength to Yahweh] instruments with
which they ascribed strength or power to Yahweh (Ke.); loud
instruments (AV., RV., Zoe.), better, with all {their) might {v. i.)
476 2 CHRONICLES
(Be., Kau., Oe., Bn., Ki.). This last involves the omission of
one Yahweh of the verse (v. i.). — 22. And Hezekiak addressed
kindly all the Levites who had shown good skill in their music
for Yahweh]. The King complimented or encouraged the Levites
on their playing. — And they (the people) did eat the offerings of the
feast seven days]. This is the best of the proposed renderings
{v. i.), harmonising completely with the remainder of the verse,
since peace-offerings were in reaUty festive meals of flesh. — Giving
thanks unto Yahweh, etc.]. Whether this praise included an
expression of penitence (so Be., Oe., EVs. making confession) or
was rather only praise and thanksgiving (Ke., Zoe.), cannot be
determined, although the former is favoured by the usage of
D"'ninD, giving thanks (v. i.). — 23. The feast was prolonged
seven other days, making a two-weeks festival. This was done
by reason of the gifts of sheep and cattle from the King and the
princes or officials (v. ^■i). A similar fourteen-days festival was
held at the completion of Solomon's Temple {cf. y), although then
the extra seven days preceded the regular feast. — 24. And a
great number of the priests sanctified themselves] and therefore the
mentioned offerings of cattle and sheep were properly handled
(cf. V. ' 293^). — 25. The participants in the feast were (i) the people
of Judah, including the priests and Levites (the latter may be a
gloss, so Ki. BH.); (2) the people from the N. kingdom; and (3)
the sojourners (Cli), proselytes from both kingdoms. On these
last cf. 2i« <"> I Ch. 22^ where they are gathered for service, but here
they have a share with native Israelites in the feast according to the
command of Ex. i2i'- *^ '-. — 26. From the days of Solomon]. The
fourteen-days festival at the dedication of the Temple had been
similar, but nothing like it had since occurred.
14. nntapDH •(•] 05 iv oh idvfiiCxrav to?s xj/evdiffiv, U /;/ quibus idolis
adolebatur incensiim, merely attempt to make this reference clearer,
V. s. — 15. ie'-ipn>i idSjj dmShi oijnjni] ^ omits icSdj and (3 D'i':'ni.
Ki. BH. suggests the reading 'pr\r\ 'jni. Since Levites could not offer
the burnt-offering, Bue. {ZAW. '99, p. 114) omits 1 before D>i'?n, thus
reading as in v. 27^ considering this i an insertion by the Chronicler.
This is doubtful, since there is no motive for adding the Levites here
(so Bn.). The Levites certainly assisted at the burnt-offering, cf.
XXXI. 1.] DESTRUCTION OF IDOLATROUS SHRINES 477
V. '«. Bn. considers 'ui M2'^Di a later addition. — Dici' Sj?] a later equiv.
of D.inp, the only use of noun ncy {cf. 3431 3510 Ne. 8' 9' 13" Dn.
818. 17 10") (BDB.).— o-dDw'DD] cf. I Ch. 617 (32)._i6. o-jnon] many MSS.,
(S, B 'ni. — 17. n3"i] possibly abs. Koe. ii. § 267b; fern, form with col-
lective sense ib. § 255d. — nu'na' f] act of slaying cstr. sg. of na''ntt', a
nominal form with the function and construction of the inf., Koe. iii.
§ 233d. — -18. n^a-ic] great number, cf. 9« i Ch. i23» i S. 2^3 Lv. 253" f.
— .13^] wanting in Vrss., may have crept in from v. ", or a ditlog-
raphy from ni^nc— nnan] Hithp. pf. 3 p. pi., n assimilated before t:,
Ges. § 54c. n with games in pause, hence t3 with s^ghol {cf. ^'\\!''}^ Ezr.
620) as in Nu. 8', Ges. § 279, Koe. i. § 271. — nV3] late usage, cf. 1 Ch.
12'^ — 1>3]. The verse-division is difficult, making it necessary to supply
n^N after i>3, with Aben Ezra, and to make the following j^dh refer to
Hezekiah. Neither is probable, hence strike out (:) with (&, H, and most
commentators. i>'3 governs So, which is followed by tj'N understood,
and thus cstr. before the following clause, Ges. § 139^ n. 3, Koe. iii.
§ 337y. RVm. reads irs' i;*^ liim that setteth his whole heart. Ba.
adopts the same construction, but transposes 3Vjn and governs with i>'3.
.The adj. occurs nowhere else with nin\ He translates The Lord
pardons the good even he that setteth, etc. On ny3 after nDD, cf. Lv. 9'
j66. 11. — 19. DinSxn] wanting in (&, H, S». — nhS\ 1 disjunctive, Koe. iii.
§ 375f. — 21. Tj? 'Sd3] read i>'-Sd3 as in i Ch. 13^, so Be., Oe., Kau., Ki.,
Bn.; also strike out, with Kau., Ki. BH., the preceding mn^S, since
this was occasioned by the present reading. — 22. aS '?y . . . "i2T'i]
spake unto the heart, i.e. kindly, cf. Gn. 34^ 502' Ju. 19^ 2 S. 19" Is. 40= Ho.
2'^ Ru. 2'' f. — 3VJ ^yt^ D^'^^'Drcn] in the present context can only mean
those who showed good skill in the art of music (Be., Ke., Bn.). For
phrase aia Saa' cf. Pr. 3^ i3'5 Ps. iii'". — -lyicn nx iSdnm] is difficult.
EVs; render they did eat throughout the feast, but Be., Ke., Oe., SS.. they
ate the offerings of the sacred season {v. s.). 05 read iSoM and they com-
pleted, instead of iSdnm, adopted by Ki. — amnc] Hithp. of m^ has force
confess in Ezr. lo' Ne. i' 9= ^ Dn. g^- 20 Lv. 5^ 16-1 26" Nu. 5', here
possibly give thanks f, BDB. v. s. — 23. nnc::'] 20 mss., <B, B 't:'3. —
24. D^in] to lift up or give for a sacrifice, cf. 35' ^- ^ also Ex. 352^ Nu.
1520, etc. — 25. miH''] (S^a omit, but add, Kal Trdaa i} iKKXrja-ia 'Ioi;5a,
after dmShi. — 27. a^^n D''jnDn] a phrase of D, cf. 23'". Many MSS.,
(^'^, U, ^ '^1, so Ba., Ki., but this is probably a correction from v. 26.
XXXI. (Assigned by Bn. and Ki. direcdy to the Chronicler.) —
1. The destruction of idolatrous shrines. — The fourteen days of
the feast culminated in an iconoclastic movement which led to the
destruction of the high places with all their equipment of pillars,
poles (aslierim), and altars throughout both the N. and S. king-
478 2 CHRONICLES
doms. In 2 K. 18', action similar to this, though confined evidently
to the S. kingdom, is ascribed to Hezekiah. — 1. And brake in
pieces the pillars and hewed down the Asherifu]. Cf. 14'. — Out of
all Judah and Benjamin} the S. kingdom {cf. iv-). — And in
Ephraim and Manasseh] representing the N. kingdom.
2-10. The organisation of the priests andof theLevites,and
their bountiful support.— 2. Hezekiah appears here as the restorer
of the priestly organisation for the service of the Temple, even as
David was its founder. — The courses] the divisions for service
in the Temple (cf. i Ch. 24'). — After their courses] after those
already established, — a renewal of the old order which had
fallen into disuse during the reign of Ahaz. — Of the priests and of
the Levites]. The former were appointed for the service of burnt-
offerings and of peace-offerings; the latter to give thanks and praise,
i.e., render the service of music, and (following the order of (§
V. i.) to minister in the gates, etc., i.e., to serve as gate-keepers (cf
I Ch. 26'). — The camp of Yahweh] a figurative expression for the
Temple, derived from the story of the tabernacle in the wilderness
{cf I Ch. 918 f- Nu. 2"). — 3. And the portion of the king from his
property he appointed for burnt-offerings . . . according to the
law of Yahweh]. The reference is to the daily, weekly, monthly,
and yearly public offerings {cf i Ch. 2330 f), commanded in Nu.
28. 29. These were, with prescribed amounts of wine, oil, and
meal, a daily sacrifice of two lambs, one in the morning and one in
the evening, and then the additional sacrifices, on each Sabbath
day two lambs, on the first day of each month seven lambs, one
ram, two bullocks, and one he-goat; on each day of the Feast of
Unleavened Bread the same; on the day of first fruits (Pentecost)
the same; on the first of the seventh month the same, less one bul-
lock, on the tenth of the seventh month (the day of Atonement) the
same as on the first (irrespective of the two goats and bullock
mentioned in Lv. 16); on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles,
fourteen Iambs, two rams, thirteen bullocks, and one he-goat; and
on each succeeding day of the feast the same less each day one
bullock, until the eighth day, when only one bullock was offered
{cf Gray, Com. on Nu.). According to Ez. the duty of providing
such public sacrifices devolved upon "the prince," i.e., the civil
XXXI. 2-21.] PROVISION FOR PRIESTS AND LEVITES 479
ruler of Israel (r/. Ez. 45'' 46-), and thus the Chronicler naturally
thought of such provision made by Hezekiah. — 4. The portion of
the priests and the Levites] first fruits and tithes, and reserved
portions of sacrifices (cf. v. ^). — That they might hold firmly to the
law of Yahweh] i.e., devote themselves to the law of Yahweh, or
more clearly to the services of worship required l)y the law.
Perhaps the reading of (B (v. i.) should be adopted, that they
should hold firmly to the ministration of the house of Yahweh.
The object was that the Levites and priests might not be com-
pelled to labour for their subsistence {cf. Ne. 13'° ^■). — 5. And
when the word (the royal command) was spread abroad the children
of Israel gave in abundance, etc.]. This and the following verses
describe the fulfilment of the command of v. ^ to give the por-
tion of the priests and the Levites. This portion was understood
according to Nu. iS'^ '-, where the first fruits are the due of the
priests, and Nu. 18-', where the tithe is the due of the Levites
(cf. also Ne. 12"). First fruits of grain, new wine and oil, are
commanded directly for the priests in Dt. i8^ {cf. Ne. 13'^); the
first fruit of honey is mentioned only here, although inferentially
commanded in Lv. 2" '-. (On grain, new wine and oil, cf. 32".) —
The children of Israel] either the inhabitants of Jerusalem {cf.
v. ") (Be., Zoe., Oe.) or the Judeans in general (Bn.). — And the
tithe of all brought they in abundani'ly]. They were not niggardly
in making their tithes, as is further illustrated in vv. i^'". — 6. And
the children of Israel] the inhabitants of the N. kingdom (Be.);
better the inhabitants of the N. kingdom wJio dwelt in the cities of
Judah, i.e., those who had migrated into Judah and there settled
(Ke., Zoe., Oe., Bn., Ba.) {cf. iC ii'^ 30"). — And of Judah].
These words appear superfluous and may be omitted as a gloss
(Kau., Bn.). If retained, then the contrast is with the children
of Israel of v. ^ {v. s.), restricted to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
while the children of Judah here would be the other Judeans. —
The tithe of cattle and sheep] not mentioned elsewhere except in
Lv. 27'"-". (A royal tithe of cattle is alluded to in i S. 8".)
— And the tithe of the dedicated things] an obscure, if not im-
possible, phrase — hence tithe may be omitted as a dittography
(Bn.). The dedicated or holy things, then, include all the gifts
480 2 CHRONICLES
which the people brought. The tithe was a holy thing (Lv. 27"'),
and first fruits might be equally so regarded {cf. first loaves of new
harvest, Lv. 23", fruit of trees of 4th year, Lv. 192'). If tithe is
retained, it may be taken as the equivalent of "the heave offer-
ings," "the contributions," the terumoth (Nu. iS^- n- 19 cf. v.'"),
"which was a remnant of that which was consecrated to Yahweh,
as the tithe was a remnant of all the cattle and field produce"
(Ke., Zoe., Oe.).
On first fruits cf. Ex. 23I6 34=2 (JE.) Dt. 18^ 26'-'i (D) Ez. 443" Lv. 23
10-14. 17. :oNu. i8i3 (P); on tithes c/.Gn. 28=2Am. 4^Dt. 126- 'i- n 14=26. 28 f.
26'2 ff- Lv. 2730 a Nu. i82'-32. A sharp line of distinction was not
originally drawn between tithes and first fruits. They might be identi-
cal. The legislation concerning them preserved in the OT., while pro-
gressive, is neither uniform nor entirely consistent {v. Dr. Conim. Dt. pp.
166/. 290 jf.; Gray, Comm. Nu. pp. 225/.; Harper, Comm. Am. andHos.
p. 95; Moore, EBi. IV. col. 5102). The Chronicler also has given an
ideal picture of these contributions for the support of the priests and
Levites as an object-lesson for his own times.
7. In the third month they began . . . and in the seventh month
they finished]. The third month, in which Pentecost fell, was the
time of the finished grain harvest, and the seventh month, in which
the Feast of the Tabernacles fell,was the time of the finished harvest
of orchards and vineyards.— 10. And ' Azariah] the name like-
wise of a priest the son of Zadok, of the time of Solomon (i K. 4=),
and a chief priest of the time of Uzziah (26'7-"«), cf. also i Ch.
535-40 (6.-H)._n;g jii^jj^ priest], (tr^snn p^r^) cf i Ch. 27^—
Of the house of Zadok] distinguished from the house of Ithamar,
to which Eli was felt to have belonged, and which, according to
I K. 2"- 36, lost the priesthood of the Temple when Zadok received
the office in the place of Abiathar. According to Ezekiel, the priest-
hood was of the house of Zadok (Ez. 44'5). In P Aaron is the
primal father of the priests.— r^e offerings] (the t'nlmah heave-
offering) the portions of all sacrifices, especially of meal-offerings,
sin- offerings, and trespass-offerings, which were reserved for the
priests and their families {cf. Nu. iS^-"). Since the opening of the
Temple these had been so abundant that the priests needed but
little of the first fruits and tithes for their support.
XXXI. 2-21.] PROVISION FOR PRIESTS AND LEVITES 481
1. nSoS] inf. abs. Pi. after prep., a late usage, Koe. iii. § 225b, Ew. §
315 c (3), but cp. n. i; cj. 24'".— 2. a^i'^'^i] Buchler (ZAW . 1899, p. in)
omits here and inserts after D^nVrSi, since it was the duty of the priests
to officiate at the sacrifices, and it belonged to the Levites " to minister,"
etc., but the Chronicler may have assumed the division of labour to be
well known. — SSnSi nnnSi n-i::'S]. (g reverses the order, better suited
to the conte.xt, since the giving of thanks, etc., was not likely " in the
gates." — .-luno] wanting in §, (5 oIkov, but both probably read jH, cf.
I Ch. 9>8 f-. — 3. rj"?] T\ ^ in constr. cf. Ges. § 95;?. — ni'?];^] wanting in <S,
&, probably due to dittography. — vj'Ui] cf. i Ch. 27''. — niSym] gov-
erned by S in ni'^>'S. — 4. -iaN''i] late use with force command, see BDB.
1CN, Qal. 4. — T\'sr\> mtna] (g iv t^ \eiTovpylq. oI'kov Kvplov = n^s n")U'3
nin\ — 5. inaoi] (§ Kai ws Trpoa-^ra^ev. — 6. ^i2^] (& ''J3 which + Sn"\B»
minii is joined with v. s. — n-nn^] seems to be a gloss, cf. 1 K. 12'^,
so Kau., Bn. — □•'orrn] (S 'tii. — on dj] (S, H + wan. — O'-a'np -i-^ym]
is dub. Bn. strikes out 'ci, so also Ki. BH. doubtfully. — 7. iiDiS]
point i^Bi'7 according to Ben Naphtali, Ges. §§ 6gn, 71. ' retained
orthographically, but is assimilated to the following consonant like
verbs I'd. — The peculiar order object, infinitive is due to Aramaic
infiuence, Dav. Synt. §111 R. 2, Dr. TH. 208 (3) Obs., Ges. § 142/
n. 2. — 10. NoS] for N'^anS as in Je. 39^- or for S'la*?, Koe. iii. § 215b.
In the latter case translate, since the offering began to come to the house
of Yahweh. If n^S = Non*^, on order object, infinitive, v. s. v. '. —
an"? -ip -irom yn^n Sidn] inf. abs. for finite verb in asyndetic clause,
Koe. iii. § 217b. Instead of first pers. pi., the clause may be trans-
lated, there is eating, and satiety and abundance remaining. — n-ium]
read after (& Kai KareXeiTrofjiev, i.niji, Oe., Kau., Ki., Bn.
11-21. The care and distribution of the provision made for
the priests and Levites.— The contributions of first fruits, tithes,
and offerings enumerated in vv. s'" were stored, under tlie care of
Conaniah and Shimei and their subordinates, in the chambers of
the Temple, w. »2 '■, while the distribution of these and all priestly-
portions was in the charge of Kore and his subordinates (vv. >■> f),
who were in the priestly cities, and gave to the priests and the
Levites according to their order of service, and according to the
enrolment of their families. — 11. The chambers of the house of
Yahweh]. Around the holy and most holy places of the Temple,
in three stories, were series of chambers (cf. i K. 6«) adapted for
store-rooms. — 12. Conaniah f] "Yahweh has established," EBi.
IIL col. 3282. — Shime'i] very common name, cf. i Ch. j'^ ei al. —
31
482 2 CHRONICLES
13. Jehrel]. Cf. i Ch. is'^.—'Azaziah]. Cf. i Ch. 15''.—
Ahihalh]. Cf. I Ch. i" 6"("'. — 'Asah'el] name of Levites 17^ Ezr.
10", elsewhere only of Joab's brother 2 S. 2" et al. i Ch. 2'^
JIJ6 277. — Jerimoth]. Cf. i Ch. 7' 12^ — Jozabad]. Cf. 1 Ch.
i2\ here perhaps the same as the chief of the Levites mentioned
in 35». — EWel\ Cf. 1 Ch. 5=^ 6'' <=*> i5''- ". — Is^nachiah] "Yahweh
sustains." — Afahalh]. Cf 29'= i Ch. 6^° ^^'•K — Benaiah]. Cf. i
Ch. 436 1513. — 'Azariah] the chief priest mentioned in v. '". —
Ruler of the house of God]. Cf. i Ch. 9". — 14. Kore]. Cf. i Ch.
9'", where Shallum the son of Kore is a chief gate-keeper, and i
Ch. 26', where Meshelemiah the son of Kore is a gate-keeper. —
Imnah] (son of Asher i Ch. 73") only here a Levite, perhaps we
should read "Heman" (IDTI instead of H^D''), since Hernan
(i Ch. 6'8 <">) and Kore (i Ch. 26') both belonged to the family of
Korah. — Was over the freewill offerings of God] not the first
fruits (the view of Oe.), which along with the tithes were com-
manded by the law, but all offerings voluntarily brought to God,
those not in the ritual, but pure thank-offerings {cf Lv. 23'' Dt.
12"), in order to distribute of these the reserved portion of Yahweh,
i.e., the share of the priests (cf Lv. 7'"- =- 10" «• Nu. 5') and also
the most holy things, i.e., the portions of the sin-offerings and
trespass-offerings which were to be eaten by the priests in the
sanctuary {cf. Lv. 2^- '" 6'° "s) 22 (so ^6 iq'- " 14^' Nu. i8^- =>) (Be.,
Ke.). The freewill offerings might also include gifts for the Temple
— gold, silver, utensils — (so here BDB., cf. in connection with the
tabernacle Ex. 35" 36^ and the second Temple Ezr. i* 8"), but
better as above. — 15. 'Eden f ] {v. i.). — Miniamin] {v. i.) this form
of name Ne. 12''- •" usually Mijamin {cf. i Ch. 24' Ne. lo^ '" ( =
12"- ■") 12^ Ezr. lo^s -j-) five persons. — Jeshua'] Levitical and
priestly name of frequent occurrence {cf. i Ch. 24"). — Shema'iah,
Amariah, Shecaniah are three names occurring very frequently in
lists of Levites. These subordinate Levites were in the cities of the
priests {cf. Jos. 2o'-"») to distribute to their brethren by courses {i.e.,
according to the divisions of the Levites for service) as well to the
great {i.e., the old) as to the small {i.e., the young). All Levites
who on account of their age or youth or the term of their appoint-
ment {cf. V. "=) were in the priestly cities were to receive their portion
XXXI. 2-21.] PROVISION FOR PRIESTS AND LEVITES 483
of the offerings. This portion, the understood object of to give,
included not only shares of the contributions and the most holy
things of V. '^, but also shares of the first fruits and tithes. Practi-
call}^ shares of the most holy things in a literal sense could not be
given to residents of the priestly cities, since, as already mentioned,
they were required to be eaten at the sanctuary. — 16. With the
exception of those registered oj males from three years, etc.] a
limitation of v. ^\ In the priestly cities no portions were given to
those residents who were in service at Jerusalem, nor to the chil-
dren of their families, who seem to have accompanied their parents
to Jerusalem. — From three years old and upward]. Priests and
Levites began to receive public support evidently at the age of
three years. Children under three years were reckoned naturally
as nursing babes. — For the thing of each day] i.e., as the duty of
each day required (RV., Kau.), better /or his daily portion (RVm.,
Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.) (r/. Ne. ii==). — 17. And in regard to the
registration of the priests it was according to their families (lit. the
fathers' houses) — now the Levites from twenty years old and
upward were registered by their divisions in their courses (for
service) — ]. The registration of the priests was strictly genealog-
ical, while that of the Levites was, according to the classes, based
upon the time and manner of their service. — From twenty years old
and upward]. Cf. 1 Ch. 23"- ". — 18. And to register {i.e., with
the purpose of registering) their children, their wives, and their sons,
and their daughters, of the entire congregation (i.e., of the entire
priesthood)] according to Be. a continuation of to give (nn^)
(v. 1^) after the parenthesis (vv. '« '•) "The men in the priests' cities
also were to register their children, etc.'''' So likewise Ke. (whom
Zoe., Oe. follow), but he renders to give to their brethren (v. "^)
. . . and to the registered of all their children, their wives and their
sons and their daughters, to the whole multitude {i.e., of the wives,
sons, and daughters) (so also Be., for '^T\p). But it is better with
Ki. Kom. to regard v. '^ as a continuation of the description of the
registration of v. '^ It served as an enrolment of every member
of the families of the priests. — For they in their faithfulness were
wont to consecrate themselves in holiness]. The enrolment was so
complete that every member of the priests' families received his
484 2 CHRONICLES
share (as a reward), because the priests so faithfully, especially in
the matter of purifications, performed the duties of their holy
office, or the passage may simply mean they sanctified or busied
themselves in a holy manner with the distribution of the sacred
portions (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ki.). Kau. considers the meaning
so doubtful that he leaves the words untranslated. — 19. Also for
the sons of Aaron the priests, in the suburbs of their cities, in each city,
were men appointed by name to distribute to every male among the
priests, and to every one registered among the Levites]. This con-
cludes the description of the enrolment and the distribution men-
tioned in vv. '5 f. (so Ki.). Others regard this as supplementary
to v. '5, drawing a distinction between the priests residing in the
cities and those in the suburbs (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.). But that
such a distinction was really drawn between priests residing in the
cities or towns and those dwelling in the outlying fields, if there
were such dwellers, is extremely improbable (v. i., Bn.). These
vv. '"-'5 are probably a late addition (so Ki. Kom.).
12. oity-iiini] wanting in 05. — ^n^<::^D] Kt. 'ji:', Qr. 'jd cf. i Ch. 1522 ".
CS"- (probably = 05) Xuvevlas favours Kt. — 13. innryi] some Heb.
Mss. in Kennic. -i'"";:;^], and so g>. (&^^ 'Ofet'os but ^ O^a^as, which
must either be a correction from M or original 05, more likely the
latter. U et Azarias. — vtj3i] (& + Kal ol viol avrov is based on an
ancient dittography or conflated. — ih^jjid] v. s. v. '2. — 15. p;*] cf.
29>2. — pD^jDi] 3 Heb. MSS. in Kennic. and Vrss. (except (T) '2\ so Ki.
Kom. The more difficult reading of M should be retained. — n;'3]
Bn. corrects to ni S;', according to <B Sia x^'P^s, but 05 more likely
misread no for n>'3. — 16. □a'n\-in na*^::] (g ^Kaaros rrjs iiriyovijs which
Bn. thinks may represent 0331 r'N, but ^^ eKros (= i^'^c), possibly
the origin of =. — iDva av •\2ib] cf. 8'^, i Ch. 16". — on^nii-'SnDj] other
MSS. '03. — 17. DNi] an example of a late usage where dn or hni
is used to give greater definiteness at the mention of a new subject
and hence may be rendered as regards (Be., Ew. § 277 d, BDB.
PN 3). 05 read hnt adopted by Ki. Kom., BH. — dmShi] ^ trans-
poses, placing the word after aijnjn. In (S Dn''m|-i'^n::2 follows a^i'^ni.
Neither change improves the text. Bn. follows the order of (I and
omits aninnDtroa {v. i.). — 18. iB'-ipn^] 3 mss. 'nn. — 19. !rn\in b:h^\ inf.
cstr. as subst., Koe. iii. § 233a. — 20. naNm]. The use of the noun nnx
with the preceding adjectives corresponds to its frequent use with the
force of an adj. {cf. as pred. Dt. 222° i K. lo'^ Dn. lo', in apposition Je.
XXXn. 1-23.] THE INVASION OF SENNACHERIB 485
lo'o Pr. 222"' ?). — 21, tf-n*?] either inf. of purpose (so rendered by Oe.,
Kau., Ki.) or of circumstance Ges. § 1140.
Bn. adopting substantially the readings of <B (v. s.), gives the following
explanation of vv. 's-'': There is no reference to a distribution outside of
Jerusalem until v. '9. The distribution (v. 's) takes place under the
oversight of the priests instead of " in the cities of the priests"; and v. is
defines more exactly the distribution: it is made to each one with his
offspring, to the males from the age of three years, etc. (a'>:'n\-in {(§ an'nipnr) is
regarded by Bn., and rightly, as a gloss). The registrations (v. "), upon
which the distribution was based, were by the priests according to families,
by the Levites according to their courses or divisions for service. V. "
then came from the hand of a reader who observed that v. " did not
harmonise with v. ", since v. "= presupposed that the children were regis-
tered, therefore he wrote on the margin, that which later entered the
text: Dtt'nvin later corrupted to ii'RTin'?, and also at the end of the
verse v^n\T' later corrupted into a'^p 1tt'^|■ln\ Their registration was
with all tfieir offspring, their wives, and their sons, and their daughters, of
the whole congregation, for they were conscientiously (mit Treue) enrolled.
Their wives is wanting in (&. It is uncertain also whether Snp congrega-
tion can designate the priests and the Levites. Since the conclusion of the
verse is corrupt, the present words might be understood of sanctifying, i.e.,
bringing (Hiph. instead of Hithp.) the holy dues, and one may have sought
in the verse the notion [hence Snp So] that exact lists of the congregation
were kept through which could be determined whether all contributed
their dues. With this explanation of vv. 's- '6 agrees the thought of v. ",
that the product of the land of the priests was distributed only to the
male members of the families and those who had been registered.
XXXII. 1-23. The invasion of Sennacherib. — Based upon
the narrative of 2 K. i8'*-i9", but freely composed by the Chron-
icler with great abridgment and the possible use of other sources
{cf. vv.* '■).
Bn. and Ki. assign these verses to M. The former says: "The
narrative is neither in style nor diction (nicht literarish und nicht in
Wortlaut) dependent upon 2 K." Yet cf. in v. ' and 2 K. 18" the men-
tion of Lachish. Cf. D''n'j3 orx no S>' (v. ">) with itrs ntn pna^n na
nn-jn (2K. i8'9) (both utterances of Sennacherib); cf. n^Dn (v. ") withn'Di
(2 K. 18"); cf. v. " with 2 K. 18"'', the latter contains the thought of the
former; v. '= with 2 K. 1822; vv. '^ '• with 2 K. 1833-35; v. 's with 2 K. iS^';
V. " with 2 K. i835 ig"- n f- {v. also v. '^); v. " with 2 K. 1828; y. '9 with
2 K. i9'8; v. 20 with 2 K. ig'^- 20; y. 21 with 2 K. 1935-37. (On vv. '3-i5 v
further i.) These parallels are all sufficient to show the dependence of one
narrative upon the other. This chapter is also an immediate continua-
486 2 CHRONICLES
tion of c. 31, as appears from After these things in v. ', and the use of
PDN faithfulness {cf. 31^°). The following marks of the Chronicler's
style also appear: In v. > pinri'i (1. 38), n'?i' (1. 114) and ai"? (1. 105);
in V. ' pen (1. 28); in v. « itj." (1. 84); in w. '3- " msiNn (1. 6 and 91).
These marks, it must be acknowledged, are not very numerous, but yet
sufficient to suggest the composition of the Chronicler. The subject
may have led him to write a style less awkward than usual.
1. After these things and this faithfulness] the reforms of
Hezekiah described in cc. 29-31. The writer has no interest in
exact chronology. The invasion of Sennacherib, according to 2
K. 18", was in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign {v. com-
mentaries in loco). The date as fixed by the Assy. ins. was 70T
B.C. The question of the second invasion of Sennacherib in
691 (Winckler's view) does not affect the interpretation cf the
Chronicler's narrative. — And encamped against the fortified cities
and he thought to break into them and so bring them unto himself].
According to 2 K. iS'^, Sennacherib took these cities, and according
to the Assyrian account they were forty-six in number (COT. pp.
294 _^.). — 4. And they stopped all the springs and the brook which
flowed through the midst of the land]. There are no living springs
in the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem, except the single
Gihon, the present Virgin's Spring, at the foot of the hill on which
the Temple stands. The writer then is either describing the closing
of springs which now no longer exist or of artificial reservoirs; or,
the more probable view, we have a mere legendary extension of
the diverting of the waters of the Gihon. This Gihon or Virgin's
Spring is in a cave on the east side of the city without the wall, and
its waters appear originally to have flowed into the Kidron valley
and thus would have been a source of supply to besiegers; but
later it was diverted through a tunnel cut in the rock south-west
and west for a distance of some 1,700 feet through the south head
of the east hill, on which the Temple stood, into the pool of Siloam
in the south-east part of the city. In this tunnel was discovered, in
1880, an inscription in pure Hebrew recording the making of the
tunnel; and, while no date is given, there is no doubt that this
is the engineering work of Hezekiah referred to in v. =" (2 K. 20=°)
and also here. He stopped the brook which flowed through the
XXXn. 1-23.] THE INVASION OF SENNACHERIB 487
midst of the land by diverting the course of its waters so that they
no longer flowed down the Kidron valley, but to the pool inside
the city wall. — 5. And he built up all the wall that was broken
and upon it towers'^ (v. i.) and another^ (v. i.) wall without].
Hezekiah not only repaired the city wall and built towers upon it,
but also, as a further means of defence, an outside wall. This
last statement has been thought to be confirmed by the discovery
of the remains of an outer wall "which may date back as far as
Hezekiah," enclosing the pool of Siloam on the south-east. (Ba.
with reference to Bliss's Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894-97, pp.
96^. 325/.) — The Millo in the city of David]. Cf. 1 Ch. 11' '■.
Winckler regards, without sufficient reason, the Millo as equivalent
to the Temple (KA T.^ p. 27 2). — And he made missiles]. The word
missiles (n^Sl' used collectively) properly means anything that is
cast: hence weapons of defence, darts, or even stones to be hurled
from the wall.- — 6. The broad place of the gate of the city]. Al-
though no particular gate is mentioned, the reference probably is
to the broad place on the east mentioned in 29' q. v. — 7. Cf. on first
half 20''^ Dt. 31^ Jos. i^ — 8. An arm of flesh] a merely human
support, cf. Je. 17° Is. 21^ Ps. 56^ <■'>. The repeated "with us" in
w. ' •• may be compared with the "Immanuel," "God with us," of
Isaiah (Is. 7'* S^- '"). — 9. After this]. The Chronicler maps the
order of events after 2 K. 18, where in v. " mention is made of
the invasion of Sennacherib corresponding with v. ' here. The
description of Hezekiah's measure for defence and the confidence
of the people (vv. '-') is the Chronicler's addition to the narrative
of 2 K. He also passes over in silence the submission of Hezekiah
and payment of tribute recorded in 2 K. i8'<-i« and continues the
narrative with the account of the embassy from Sennacherib.
In this he draws from both of the narratives of 2 K., i.e., i8''-i99»
and i9i"'-35. — Before Lachish]. 2 K. 18". Cf. on Lachish 25". —
10. Upon what are ye trusting?] Cf. 2 K. i8'^ — Fe* dwellers in
siege in Jerusalem] {v. i.). The besieged people of Jerusalem are
addressed. — To die by famine and thirst]. Cf. 2 K. 18"'', where
in grosser language the same thought is presented. — Saying Yah-
weh, etc.]. Cf. 2 K. 18^°. — The Chronicler now omits the argu-
ment of the Assyrian based upon Hezekiah's lack of troops and
488 2 CHRONICLES
reliance on Egypt, given in 2 K. iS^'", possibly because the As-
syrian's contempt of Hezekiah's forces might seem not in accord
with the military preparations already ascribed to the monarch
(vv. 5 f); and because the reference to Egypt might imply the seek-
ing of foreign aid, which, from the Chronicler's point of view,
would have been unthinkable in the case of the good Hezekiah.
— 13-15. These w. continue the argument of 2 K. 18^2. 33^ which
also appears in 2 K. ig'i-i'. The Assyrian urges that Yahweh
cannot be expected to save Jerusalem, because the gods of no other
people have saved them from the Assyrians. — 16. And his servants
spake yet more, etc.]. The writer either thus refers to his abridg-
ment of the material of 2 K. or this is a rhetorical statement. — 17.
He nmote also letters]. Cf. the letter mentioned in 2 K. ig'<
(Is. 37")- — To reproach the God of Israel]. This motive or act is
mentioned in 2 K. ig^- '6. s-. 23 (is_ 27*- i^- =3. 2^). — As the gods, etc.].
Cf. V. '5. Since v. '^ may be said to come as an interruption be-
tween V. '« and V. '8, it is regarded by Bn. as a gloss. — 18. And they
cried with a loud voice, etc.]. Cf. 2 K. 18=8. The conversation
between Rabshakeh, the Assyrian messenger, and the Judean
officials (2 K. 1826) has been omitted. — 19. In 2 K. ip" the gods of
the nations conquered by the Assyrians are called "no gods but
the work of men's hands." — 20. The prayer of Hezekiah is given
in 2 K. 1915-19 and a message (not a prayer) of "Isaiah the son of
Amoz" in 2 K. ig^"-". This is the only direct reference by the
Chronicler to these passages. — 21. Cf. 2 K. 1935-37^ where these
facts are given more in detail. — And Yahweh sent an angel]. This
form of expression compared with that of 2 K. 1935, "The angel of
Yahweh went forth," is agreeable to the later conception of Yah-
weh working through agents rather than directly. The angel of
Yahweh might be understood as a direct manifestation of deity,
but not so an angel sent by Yahweh. The narrative implies the
destruction of the Assyrians through pestilence, and this main fact
is confirmed by an Egyptian legend recorded by Herodotus
(ii. 141) (Sk.). — His god] Nisroch, probably identical with
Nusku the Assyrian god of fire (2 K. 193' Is. 3738). — They that
came forth from his own loins] his sons Adrammelech and
Sharezer (2 K. 1937 Qr. Is. 3735). The statement of the Chronicler
XXXn. 1-23.] THE INVASION OF SENNACHERIB 489
is more poignant than that of 2 K. — 22. And he gave them rest*
on every side\
!■ 'i-b'v'] usually rendered faithfulness, but since this meaning is un-
suitable in the present context, Perles explains by connecting with the
Babylonian amdtu "word"; and by pointing as pi., n'DX, he removes
the syntactical difficulty arising through the necessity of construing n'^xn
with both a sg. and a pi. {v. /.). Then O'liain is a gloss explaining this
nbNn {OLZ. 8, 1905, col. 125). — rhn7\'\ belongs to both onain and
rcNH, Koe. iii. § 334 li. — v'^n oyp^'^] a pregnant construction with Sn;
Koe. iii. § 213a. vSs wanting in (S, U. 2 K. 18" D■u^•fln^1. — 4. mj'-j.'Dn Sr]
(^ TO, v8aTa twv TrrjyQv as in v. ^. — inxn] (5 ttjs 7r6Xews. — . . . ^07D 1X13'
INXD1] CS, g>, sg., cf 28'6 3o«. — 5. pTnnii] cf. iK — niSnjcn hy Sri] with
Sp'i as Qal, And he went up on the towers, can scarcely be the true
reading; nor yet with '^>'''1 as Hiph., though defended by Ba., who
renders And he brought up (restoration) upon the towers, i.e., "He re-
paired the towers." (§ omits '^'J? "^yi. H renders et exstruxit turres
desuper. Hence read either (i) n1S^JD^ n^Sj; Sjjn, And he raised up
towers thereon (Ew., Ke., Zoe., Ki. Kom., BH.), or (2) omit ^V as a
dittography, And he raised up the towers (Kau. note), or (3) n>V>M
^1S^J:D, And he built towers thereon (Be., Oe.). This last is to be pre-
ferred, since riVjj is nowhere else used of the erection of buildings. —
nsin'^] if correct towards the outside; possibly n is a dittography, so
Koe. iii. § 3301. Yet instead of mnN nmnn read mns nnin (Ki. BH.)
another wall. — a''j:i?:i] wanting in (S, possibly a gloss (Bn.). — 10. aOw"'!]
^,11, omit 1 probably correctly. — 12. rnic2 pn n^Dn irT'iirm Nin nSh] 2 K.
1822 (= Is. 36') v.-ca nx in^pin T'Dh nrx wn NiSn, the antecedent of Nin
being irnSx ni.T', while here Nin is used in a late and rare construc-
tion qualifying n'^pm^ that Hezekiah (BDB. Nin 1 e). Thus the Chron-
icler giv^es the thought a slightly different turn. According to the author
of K., Sennacherib jays that the God who had suffered his high places
and altars to be overturned could not be trusted to render aid to his
people. According to the Chronicler, Sennacherib attempts to arouse
distrust of Hezekiah. — irx'^] wanting in 2 K. (and Is.). — inN narc] 2 K.
(Is.) (§ nrn nainn. — iTiopn vSjn] wanting in 2 K. (and Is.). — 13-15.
These verses are clearly dependent on 2 K. i832b. 33. 35 j^u, y. "* repre-
sents 2 K. 19" rewritten as follows:
V. '^* nisixn inj; SoS ipuni ijn irT'cy nn lynn nSh
2 K. 19" nixiNH hjh iiu'N i:>Ss wy la's ns n;jca' nnx njn.
The Chronicler has changed the exclamatory sentence of 2 K. into
an equally strong ironic question. The phrase the kings of Assyria
is changed into the more definite I and my fathers, and peoples is
inserted before lands. The remainder of v. '^ is taken from 2 K. 18",
thus:
490 2 CHRONICLES
2 K. i833 niii'N l^c niD ixnx pn it'n DMjn ipSn V?'>xn Ssnn.
Here the verse in 2 K. is strengthened by the addition of the verb "ro'
and the Chronicler in characteristic fashion expands the gods of the nations
into the gods of the nations of the lands, and, as he changed the kings of
Assyria into the more definite / and my fathers {v. s.), so he also changed
from the hand of the king of Assyria into from my hand. This depend-
ence upon two separated passages of 2 K. explains the inconsistence
between the two parts of the verse. It is otherwise peculiar that Sen-
nacherib and his fathers should figure in the first part and in the sec-
ond Sennacherib should refer only to himself. The following verse
14 is taken from 2 K. iS'^ with the following changes: Pisisn
becomes nSxn dmjd, to which is added the phrase '■max innnn irs;
S3' strengthens Sxj where 2 K. uses only the latter verb (as in the
preceding verse); isy is substituted for ixis; and for ns nini S^'X'' ^2
niD oSiyn' of 2 K. the Chronicler gives us "'T'O dopn S''snS DJin'^x Sjr ^3.
In writing the first part of v. 's, the Chronicler probably had 2 K.
iS^b before him, while the remainder of this verse is simply the ansv/er
to the question of v. '^ — 15. 'rj'] wanting in (S, H, is possibly a dit-
tography. — iS-'i"'] many mss., Vrss. Siv, cf. v. '". — •'3 ']i<] after a nega-
tive proposition serves to intensify the negative, with the force how
much less, Ew. § 354 c (2), cf. Koe. iii. § 353a. — 17. DnsDi] ($ sg. icD
is often used for royal missives, v. BDB. — 18. iNipii] three mss., ^^a^ ;|jj
sg., probably due to sg. in v.", cf. v.^K — 21. ix^S'Ci] Qr. 'n — from
Ni?' adj. t- Perhaps originally "'t<X''C-i (Ki. BH.), And some of those
who came forth from his loins. — 22. S3] some MSS. add va^.N, and so
Bn. The addition is natural but not indispensable. — a-'nri] And
guided them (AV., RV.), followed by aoDa from round about, is most
awkward if not impossible. (& Kal Kariiravcev ai^Toi>s and H et prcestitit
eis Quietem; hence read onS nri (v. s.) a frequent phrase, cf. 14^ i5'5
2o3o I Ch. 22'8, so Be., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki.
24-26. Hezekiah's sickness and pride.— An epitome and inter-
pretation of 2 K. 2o'-'» (Is. 38. 39). Without the details are men-
tioned (i) Hezekiah's serious sickness, (2) his prayer for recovery,
(3) the acceptance of his prayer, (4) the sign of his recovery, (5)
Hezekiah's subsequent pride, (6) the anger of Yahweh, (7)
Hezekiah's humiliation, and (8) the stoppage of the divine wrath
during his days.
On account of this abridgment Bn. assigns these verses to M, since the
Chronicler, he thinks, would have reproduced so edifying a narrative as
2 K. 20'-" quite fully. Ki. (Kom.), on the other hand, rightly assigns
them to the Chronicler.
XXXn. 24-33.] HEZEKIAH'S SICKNESS AND WEALTH 491
24. /;/ those days Hezekiah was sick unto death] a direct
quotation of 2 K. 20''' (Is. 38'"). Those days here can only mean
the days of the Assyrian invasion and the deliverance from Sen-
nacherib. (This likewise is the meaning in 2 K. 20'. Hezekiah's
reign was twenty-nine years and his days were prolonged after his
illness fifteen years; hence the date of his illness was placed in his
fourteenth year, which coincided with the date of Sennacherib's
invasion.) — And he prayed unto Yahweh]. The prayer is given
in 2 K. 20= f- (Is. 382 f). — And he spake unto him] through
Isaiah with the promise that his days should be prolonged fifteen
years (2 K. 20^ ^- Is. 38^ ^■). — And gave him a sign] the sign of
the shadow moving backward on the sundial (2 K. 20^-" Is. 38^ '•),
omitted by the Chronicler. — 25. And Hezekiah did not render
according to the henefit to him for his heart was lifted up]. This
statement is based upon Hezekiah's apparent pride in displaying
his treasures unto the messengers of Merodach-baladan (v. ")
(2 K. 20'- f- Is. 39' f ). He should have taken pride not in his
wealth but in Yahweh his God and deliverer. — Therefore wrath
was upon him and Judah and Jerusalem] an interpretation of
Isaiah's prediction of the Babylonian captivity (2 K. 20" Is. 39^).
— 26. Ayid Hezekiah humbled himself over the pride of his heart,
he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the wrath of Yahweh
came not, etc.] a proper inference from Hezekiah's acquiescence
in the word of Yahweh (2 K. 20' ^ Is. 39^) and the fact that
the captivity took place a century later.
27-33. Hezekiah's wealth and the conclusion of his reign.
Bn. is inclined to give these verses also to M (with the exception,
probably, of vv. ^- ' ); Ki. (Kom.) to the Chronicler with trustworthy
historical information from an old extra-canonical source in vv. ^°- ^3
(v. i.).
27. And Hezekiah had wealth and honor exceedingly abundant-
ly]. Cf. the similar statement twice repeated of the good King
Jehoshaphat (17^ 18') and the wealth of Solomon (i'^) and of
David (i Ch. 29"). The King's wealth is recorded as an ex-
pression of the worth of his character. Silver and gold and spices
are mentioned in 2 K. 2o'3 (Is. 39") among the treasures which
492 2 CHRONICLES
Hezekiah displayed to the ambassadors of Merodach-baladan. —
Shields] the small, round shield (r/. comment on i Ch. i2"<2<)),
either representing weapons in general (Ke.), costly gilded weapons
(Zoe.), treasures, shields like those of Solomon (g'^) (Ba.), or with
different text {v. i.) precious things (Ba.). The shields also may be
an inference from "the house of his armor" (T»^3 D''2) of 2 K.
20'3 (Is. ^g-). — 28. Grain, new wine, and oil]. These are repeat-
edly thus mentioned together as the products of the land of Israel
(31^ Nu. i8'= Dt. 7'3 ii^i 12" 1423 i8^ 28^' Ne. 5" io^°'"> 135- '^ je.
31'= Ho. 2XX5' 2^("' Jo. i'° 2'=' Hg. I") {BI)'B.).--And stalls for
flocks *] thus (after (g, 1) AV. "cotes for flocks"; the RV. follows
ijf , rendering, " And flocks in folds." — 29. Cities] in this connection
with stalls and focks and possessions of sheep and cattle appear out
of place, hence the interpretation of "watch towers " has been given
after a usage in 2 K. 17^ (Be., Ke., Zoe., Oe.). This is rightly
rejected as inadmissible by Kau., Bn. The text is probably cor-
rupt (v. i.). We should either place cities at the beginning of
V. -8 (reading the verb of v. " he provided (lit. he made) with that
verse), And he made for himself store cities, etc., and acquired
possessions of sheep and cattle in abundance, or with a similar con-
struction omit the word cities entirely. And he made store houses,
etc. Ki. retains and translates cities. The originality of this is
possible with such an awkward writer as the Chronicler. Ba.
thinks the cities were meant chiefly as places for refuge for the
flocks and herds in time of war. — 30. And this same Hezekiah,
etc.]. The reference is to the engineering work described in v. ■". —
The upper Gihon] the Virgin's Spring (see v. ^). Called upper
probably in contrast to the lower flow of water at the end of the
tunnel. — And he led them straight down westward to the city of
David] RV. "on the west side of the city of David." The
Heb. allows either rendering, and our knowledge of the location
of the city of David is too indefinite for us to determine which is
correct. The former is favoured by Oe., Ki. (nach der Stadt
Davids) {cf. v. ■•). — 31. This verse is joined closely with the last
clause of v. 3°. — And Hezekiah prospered in all his works and so
God abandoned him (i.e., left him to his own free will) in the case
of the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon who had been sent to
XXXn. 24-33.] HEZEKIAH'S SICKNESS AND WEALTH 493
him to inquire concerning the -wonder which had been in the land,
in order to know all that was in his heart]. Because Hezekiah
enjoyed such unbroken prosperity God left him to liis own will,
not to bring misfortune upon him, but to reveal to him his pride
and thus, as the sequel showed, to bring, him in humility unto God
(cf. V. ") (Be., Ke., Zoe.). The verse has also been taken in con-
trast to the foregoing words of v. =", the introductory particle
(]31) being rendered "Howbeit" (AV., RV., 1^ attamen, Oe., Ba.).
It is doubtful, however, whether the Hebrew particle admits such
a rendering. — Who had been sent] {(B, H, ®, Kau., Ki.) is a better
reading, involving merely a change in the Hebrew vowel points
{v. i.), than that of M, "who had sent " (AV., RY.).— The wonder].
Cf. v. 24. This was appropriately an object of inquiry by those
from Babylon, the seat of the study of the movements of the
heavenly bodies. According to 2 K. 20'= <^-, however, the King of
Babylon sent the embassy to condole with Hezekiah in his sick-
ness.— 32 f. The conclusion of Hezekiah's reign expressed in a
formula nearer that of the author of Kings than the usual one of the
Chronicler (cf. 2 K. 20"). — His pious deeds] either in respect to
God or man or both; thus mentioned only of Hezekiah and
Josiah (35^0 and Nehemiah (Ne. i3'0- — The vision of Isa iah the
son of Amoz]. The reference probably is to the Book of Isaiah,
which contains the account of the invasion of Sennacherib and
Hezekiah's sickness, since these are the opening words of that
book (cf. Is. I'). — And^ in the book of the kings of Judah and
Israel] v. Intro, pp. 22/. (on p. 23 join (0) as an exception, re-
quired by the insertion of and, with (w)). — And they buried him in
the ascent of the sepulchres of the sons of David]. Bn. regards this
burial-place, onlv mentioned here, as outside of the graves of the
kings, and since this befell otherwise, according to the Chronicler,
only impious kings (Jehoram 21=", Joash 24", Uzziah 2623, Ahaz
28"), he thinks this statement cannot be an invention either of the
Chronicler or of a like-minded source, but must rest upon an old
reliable tradition (Ki. accordingly marks it thus in his translation)
{Kom.). The statement doubtless is historic, but it does not
necessarily imply a burial-place outside of the royal sepulchres.
The word ascent (r!7yD) might mean upper locality, hence they
494 2 CHRONICLES
buried him in the higher part of the graves of sons of David, or even
as H renders: They buried him above the sepulchres of the sons of
David. Be., Ke., Zoe., after Thenius, on 2 K. 20^1, conjecture that
the burial in the ascent was due to the lack of room in the hereditary
burying-place of the kings. "The chiefest of the sepulchres"
(AV.) is not an allowable rendering. — And all Judah and the in-
habitants of Jerusalem did him honor at his death] perhaps in
the burning of spices ((/. ib'"" 2i'»).
24. iy] wanting in 2 K. 20'. — ionm] ® Kal iir-fiKovaev, B exaudivilque,
Ki. BH. suggests "ir^i'^v — 26. n^ja] (B (iir6 toO Hi^povs, but cf. Vieoquod,
&. — 27. DMJnSi] ($ Kxl oirXod-^Kas. Ba. suggests mj-ijo*?! aJid precious
things as in v. 23. — mnn ^hs] desirable vessels, cf. 36'° Ho. 13'^ Na.
2'° Je. 25'^ Dn. 118. — 28. nuaODi] elsewhere always with •■>", cf. 8^
(= I K. 919) 8^ 1712 (on i6^ see notes), Ex. in f. (B Kat ttoXm.
Possibly a-'iyi in v. " is in the wrong place by scribal error and we
should read 'd t^>n, atid store-cities (yet see v. "). — ncn^i n-na Sd'^]
for all kinds of cattle Ges. § 123/. — nnixS Dm>'i] read with 05,13, niniNi
Dm;''7, so Ki., Bn. g» omits the clause. The vocalisation r-nw Bn.
describes as an unnecessary attempt to differentiate the word from the
previous mnN. — 29. onyi] either out of place (see v.-^) or a dittography
of amy of v. ^s (Bn.). The object of n-cy in the latter case was nij;Dni
(v. 28) and ni*7 in the meaning of acquire is understood with njpci
ai'^ ipai JNX. — 30. iv^^n] modifies nxid, Koe. iii. § 334 7- — 3"i-'^m] Kt.
01F"]> Qr. either D'l.B'li Hiph. with ^ assimilated or D")E"j Pi. with '
syncopated, Ges. § 6gu. — nanjT] g-^ nmrs. — 31. p^] Oe. reads pN
with adversative force, Gleichwohl. — 3~n^ran] (& rots aTroffTaXetcnu,
H qui missi fuerant = 0''Ji^VTpr\, so also JF, is preferable (v. s.). — T^"^]
interpreter Gn. 42^, intermediator between God and man Jb. ^^-^ Is.
43", hence here properly ambassador f. — 32 . S'] read "^r with Q§>, If,
21. — 33. nSyc] (g dpa^dcrei, U super. — ^nD^] (S Kal d6^av Kal tl^t^v —
'2^ nini may be due to a misread dittography of iMn.
XXXIII. 1-20. The reign of Manasseh (686(?)-64i b. c.).—
When Manasseh, at the early age of twelve, came to the throne
the idolatrous and anti-prophetic party in Judah seems to have
obtained control of affairs, and the young King became thoroughly
identified with it during his long reign. Under his patronage not
only the worship at the high places was revived, but varieties of
heathen (Assyrian) worship were introduced. Altars to the host
of heaven were placed in the courts of the Temple and an Asherah,
XXXm. 1-20.] REIGN OF MANASSEH 495
later understood as a graven image, in the Temple itself. Manasseh
also sacrificed his son and practised divination. He shed also
much innocent blood, probably of those who adhered strictly to
the worship of Yahweh. Thus his reign, through its wickedness,
was long regarded as having sealed the doom of Judah. In the
narrative of Kings, which is entirely written by the Deuteronomic
compilers, nothing relieves the blackness and foulness of Manas-
seh's reign. In the Chronicler's narrative, however, the King
suffers captivity and humbles himself and is restored to his king-
dom, and, acknowledging Yahweh to be God, he built an outer
wall to the city and removed the foreign gods and heathenish altars
from its midst.
Neither Bn. nor Ki. assigns this narrative to other than the Chronicler
and his canonical source.
1-9. Manasseh's idolatry. — A copy, with only very slight omis-
sions and variations, of 2 K. 21'-""'. — 1. 2 K. 21' adds the name of
his mother, "Hephzi-bah." — 2. And he did that which was evil in
the eyes of Yahweh] the usual expression in i and 2 K. for sins
of cultus. These of Manasseh are given in the following verses and
are here condemned as a repetition of the abominations of the
aboriginal Canaanites (r/. v. ^ 28^ 2 K. 16' 17'- ")• — 3. The high
places which Hezekiah his father had broken down]. Cf. 31'. — And
he reared up altars for the Ba alim and made Asheroth]. 2 K. 21 =
has in each case the singular "for Baal" and "an Asherah," with
the additional clause "As did Ahab king of Israel," and the writer
of Kings evidently has in mind the worship of some one Ba'al, like
the Tyrian one of Ahab (cf 17 2), and the erection of some one
symbolic post (cf. 14'), possibly representing the goddess Astarte.
The Chronicler thinks, on the other hand, of separate Baals or
Canaanitish gods at each high place, with also, correspondingly,
the sacred poles. — All the host of heaven] the heavenly bodies
(sun, moon, and stars). This worship, introduced under Assyrian
influence, or encouraged (since it clearly had not been unknown in
earlier times in Israel) (GFM. EBi. III. col. 3355), became at
once prevalent, as is shown by its frequent mention in the literature
of this period, the century before the exile (cf. Dt. 4'' 17^ Zp.
496 2 CHRONICLES
i» Je. 8^ 19'')- — 4. And he built altars in the house Yahweh] i.e.,
for foreign deities or Baals. — Whereof Yahweh said in Jerusalem
shall be my name forever]. Cf. 7'^ i K. S'^ 9^. The promise or
command centralising the worship of Yahweh in Jerusalem found
expression in the sole worship of Yahweh in the Temple. — 5. All
the host of heaven]. Cf. v. ^ — In the two courts]. The Temple of
Solomon had only one court, hence this verse in 2 K. (215) is
post-exilic (Bn., St.). — 6. In this verse Manasseh is said to
have been guilty of six things expressly forbidden in Dt. 18'" '■.
— He caused his sons to pass through the fire] i.e., he sacrificed
them unto Yahweh (cf. 28=). — And he practised soothsaying]
besides Dt. i8'»- '^ 2 K. 21% alluded to also in Lv. 19" Ju. 9" Is. 2«
Mi. 5" (12) Je. 273 Is. 57= (Dr. Dt.). The kind of divination referred
to is imcertain : the word has been connected with the root mean-
ing cloud, hence divination by observing the clouds or sky, or the
word " eye," " to smite with evil eye." Both of these, however, are
now generally rejected, but nothing satisfactory has taken their
place. The word is held to be derived from a root meaning "to
utter a hoarse nasal sound" {EBi. II. col. 1119). — And he used
enchantments] as Joseph did with his cup (Gn. 445- ^^), probably
by hydromancy, or watching the play of light or rings of liquid in a
cup. The term includes di\'ination by observing omens in general.
— And he practised sorcery]. The meaning of this verb has
been variously explained: to cut, and hence the derived meaning
here to use "herbs or drugs shredded into a magic brew" {cf.
witchcraft Mi. 5" "->), or to obscure, to be gloomy, distressed, and
finally to be a suppliant, to seek something from the deity {EBi.
III. col. 2900). — And he instituted ghosts and familiar spirits] i.e.,
persons professing to deal with them. For a full discussion of
the terms v. Dr. Dt. pp. 225/. The character of these persons
is seen in "the witch of Endor," i S. 28" «•, who was described
as a woman possessing a ghost, and in the maiden of Acts i6'6 ^■,
who was possessed with a spirit of divination. Manasseh fostered
people of this description. — 7. Tfie graven image of the idol which
he had made] in 2 K. 21 ^ "the graven image of the Asherah."
The Chronicler brings out clearly his conception of the Asherah
there mentioned: it is an idol. Whether he thought of the fe-
XXXm. 1-20.] REIGN OF MANASSEH 497
male deity Astarte in this connection is not clear, but another
name from that of Yahweh was localised in the Temple.
1. 2 K. 21' + n3 'ssn ion di;'i. — 3. ninarD - . . pican pn] ^ trans-
poses.— fnj] 2 K. 21' ^3^^ — niT.;'N . O'lS^'a'^] 2 K. sg. — nnrs] 2
K. + SsTi" iSd 2NnN n-yy t.;',xd omitted by the Chronicler, since he
does not record the doings of Ahab. — 4. The first part of this verse is
seemingly inconsistent with the second, since the house of Yahweh and
Jerusalem are not identical. Klo. (on 2 K. 21^) suggests Tijja for
ni.T n>33 (c/. 2 Ch. 28-^); St. {SBOT. on 2 K.) regards the verse as a
gloss to V. 5 (based on v. ''), logically belonging after v. ^. Possibly
the writer used Jerusalem, since it included the Temple area. — nj3i]
weak 1 with the pf., taken from 2 K. 21^. — ninarn] Ki. reads 'rn,
the altars, identifying them with those mentioned in v. ^, but those seem
to have been built at the high places. — oSiyS •«Dii' n-in^] 2 K. hn cu-n
IDS'. — 6. -\-'2-;r\ Nini] 2 K. 21^ T'^ym. — vja] §, 2 K., ij3, but 05 of 2 K.
pi. The sg. in ^ is doubtless a correction from 2 K., cf. 28'. — p •'J3
o:n] wanting in 2 K., and likely added by the Chronicler, cf. 2?,^. — itr'Di]
wanting in 2 K., elsewhere only pt., as subst., meaning sorcerer, Dt.
18'"; fem. sg., sorceress, Ex. 22"; masc. pi. Ex. 7" Dn. 2- Mai. 3^ f.
— 'jyT'i] 2 K. D'ljyT'i. This word is always used with the preceding
31N (sg. or pi.) I S. 283 9 Is. 819 193 2 K. 216 23M Lv. 1931 206- 2? Dt.
18" t- H. P. Smith regards both 3in and "iJiM^ as some sort of idols
(Sam. pp. 239 /.). — njin] in 2 K. Bn. connects after (B with nr;i.
— iDipn'^] 2 K. Dv^n'^, but 38 Mss. (5, §, ®, of 2 K. point to the read-
ing of 2 Ch. as the original. — 7. ':'::d.-i] instead of 2 K. 21' n-ni-Nn. —
Din^NH non] 2 K. n''23 alone, but ®^ ^x oif/c<^ Ki/pW and H z« temple
Domini, nin^ rrija. ovnSxn in Ch. certainly points to rnni in 2 K. — ■
D'hSn] 2 K. nin\ — aiS^j'S] scribal error for a'^^yS as in 2 K., so most;
yet may be dissimulation for DiSij; = aSiy z;. note of Hpt. in Ki., SBOT. —
8. T'D.-i^] 2 K. 21^ T'jn'^. (§ (TaXeOcrat in both places, and K moveri
and commoveri point to the reading of 2 K. as original, so Oe. Bn.
suggests that the Chronicler substituted a word more common in his
time. 11J is not used in the writings of the Chronicler. — Sj7d] 2 K.
jr. — \-nDj!n] read with 2 K., (5, U, §>, ^■^^J, so Kau., Ki., Bn. —
D3\ni3N''] read with 2 K. and Vrss. dp — , so Be, Oe., Ki. — ^2 Pis']
2 K. Sa3. — Sj'^] 2 K. SoSi. — a^afltt'cni D'pnm] an addition by the Chron-
icler.— nrn n'3] 2 K. n-i-n nay dpn nis iii'n, so too &, which may
have been influenced by 2 K. — 9. 2 K. 21' is introduced by ijJCB' nVi. —
o'^ifn^ >3'i'n mini pn] is expressed in 2 K. by the pron. sf. of the third
pers. pi., D?pii. — •;-\] 2 K. jJin pn.
10-13. Manasseh's captivity, repentance, and restoration.
— This paragraph, with the exception of the opening words. And
32
498 2 CHRONICLES
Yahweh spake, is entirely wanting in 2 K., which gives no indica-
tion either of Manasseh's captivity or of his repentance and
restoration. The passage then has been regarded as a pure in-
vention, an allegory of Israel in exile, and received by the
Chronicler with the motive of accounting for Manasseh's un-
usually long reign — fifty-five years — a reign of that length being
unthinkable in the case of a king wholly bad (St. Gesch. I. p.
640), or simply invented by the Chronicler through this motive
(We. Prol. pp. 206/.). Besides the silence of 2 K., against
Manasseh's repentance is Je. 15^, which, since there the captivity
is grounded upon the sin of Manasseh, clearly shows that his
repentance must be regarded as a fiction. The case, however,
is different with the story of his captivity. Manasseh's name
occurs in the Assy. ins. among the list of the kings, tributary to
Esarhaddon and Asurbanipal, of the Chatti country, embracing
Phoenicia and Philistia. These same lands also were engaged
during the reign of Asurbanipal in a rebellion (648-647 B. c.)
in support of the King's brother Shamash-shumukin, viceroy at
Babylon, and there is no reason why Manasseh might not have
been involved in this rebellion or have incurred such suspicion.
In that case he may well have been taken captive either to Nineveh
or to Babylon, since the inscriptions show that the King received
embassies there. Later also Manasseh might have been released
and restored to his throne. Such treatment Necho I, King of
Egypt, received from Asurbanipal. Hence this captivity and
release may be received as historical. (This result was especially
reached by Sch. COT. II. pp. 53 /.; KAT.- pp. 367 /.) Cf.
also Sayce, HCM. pp. 458 Jf.; Dr. in Hogarth, Authority and
Archeology, pp. 114 ff., who, admitting in abstract the possibility of
the narrative, finds diflaculty in the circumstances in which the
statement occurs; TKC. EBi. III. coll. 2926/.; McC. HPM.
II. pp. 377 ff. Winckler, who formerly held this view, AT.
Untersuch. p. 122, now places Manasseh's visit to Babylon under
Esarhaddon earlv in his reign. " ISIanasseh was summoned before
Esarhaddon, before whom he defended his conduct and was
acquitted. WTiether the investigation was held in Assyria or at
Babylon it is difficult to determine" (KAT.^ p. 274).^ — 11. The
XXXm. 1-20.] REIGN OF MANASSEH 499
king of Assyria] Esarhaddon or Asurbanipal (v. s.). — With
hooks], (i) Figurative of Alanasseh's treatment like a wild beast
(Ke.), (2) with the meaning of fetters (^, TJ, ®, Be., Oe.), (3)
literal: Assyrian kings sometimes thrust a hook into the nostrils
of their captives and so led them about, a practice illustrated
on many Assyrian reliefs in the British Museum (Ba.), (4) the
name of a place, an unknown Hohim (Th. in Be.) (D^mn a
corruption of IIT'T', Jericho, TKC. v. s. op. cit.). The literal
view was probably intended by the writer. — To Babylon] v. s.
McCurdy {v. s. op. cit.) thinks this a substitution by a later
scribe or copyist for an original to Nineveh.
14-17. Manasseh's enlargement of the city wall and reform
of the cultus. — 14. This can only mean that outside the exist-
ing rampart of the citadel, on the ridge above the present Virgin's
Spring, Manasseh constructed another line of fortification, which
he carried northward past the Temple Alount and round its
northern slope. — 15. And he removed, etc.]. Cf. vv. ' -^ This
statement of the removal of the foreign gods and idols from the
Temple and Jerusalem by Manasseh is not exactly consistent with
the account of 2 K., which, knowing nothing of Manasseh's con-
version, assigns such a cleansing of the Temple and of the city to
Josiah (2 K. 23^-^). — 17. Nevertheless the people, etc.]. The
Chronicler felt the necessity of this statement in view of the
permanence of the idolatry nourished during the reign of
Manasseh.
18-20. The conclusion of Manasseh's reign. — 18. And the
rest of the acts of Manasseh]. This formula is derived from 2 K. 21 '',
but the remainder of this verse is from the Chronicler and clearly
shows a source distinct from 2 K., since it contained his prayer.
On the basis of this statement was composed the Prayer of Manas-
seh, a Hellenistic composition of early date found in the Apocrypha
(though not in all Mss.) {DB. III. pp. 232/.). In the Enghsh edi-
tions of the Apocrypha it occurs just before i Mac. — The words
of the seers] probably refer to prophetic admonitions addressed
to Manasseh, which, with the prayer, were recorded in the Acts
(or history) of the kings of Israel (v. Intro, p. 21). — 19. This verse
seems to have come from a later hand than the preceding, and to be
500 2 CHRONICLES
merely a fuller statement of the same facts. — The words (or the
hisiory) of the seers *] can scarcely refer to anything else than the
words of the seers of v. i', the title probably of a section of The Acts
of the kings of Israel (v. s.) — although an independent work is pos-
sible, though not probable (v. Intro, p. 23). — High places]. Cf. 11".
— Asherim]. Cf. 14^ — Graven images]. Cf. 34^. — 20. And they
buried him in the garden"^ of his house]. The reading of M, " They
buried him in his house," is a mistake to be rectified by the true
reading of (g and 2 K. 2i^K 2 K. adds also "in the garden of
Uzza," probably meaning of King Uzziah. The reference may
have been then to one laid out by that King in the court of the
palace, and since it is called the garden of his own house, Manasseh
may have built a house there within the grounds of which was his
sepulchre and also that of Amon (2 K. 2125), and possibly Josiah,
who was buried in his o\mi sepulchre (2 K. 23'°).
^26
29
11. D^nini] nin usually means brier, bramble. Here and in Jb. 40'
hook or ring in jaw; perhaps point D^nn from nn, hook, ring, cf. Is. 37
2 K. 19". Pointing also doubtful in Job. — 13. h -inyi] wanting in <&}-,
but the following •;•2Z'^^, translated by the same word in CS^-'^, accounts
for the omission. — 16. p^] Qr., most MSS., &, S, 15M. About 25 MSS.,
(8, |d;i, so Ki. — 17. "^aN] as adversative, also i< 19^ Ezr. lo'' Dn. lo'- 2' t-
Koe. iii. § 372b. — 18. 19. 1 Sxi'i" T'r'c] wanting in 05. — 19. ^Tin] read
with one MS., (&, anin, so Kau., Bn. — 20. imap^i] 2 K. 2i>s pa -\3?^m
NTj? pa 1,-1^3. Here, then, add p3 with (S, so Bn., Ki. (St., SBOT. on
K.). — pcN] (&^^ 'A/xws, so too in following verses.
21-25. The reign of Amon (641-639 b. c). — Taken from 2 K.
2119-24. Of this King's brief reign nothing is recorded except that
he followed in the evil footsteps of his father. Manasseh clearly
was subservient to Assyria, and probably the policy of his son was
the same, hence his death may have been caused by an Egyptian
party (GAS. /. II. p. 198), possibly representing the Patricians and
Priesthood of Jerusalem (Erbt, Die Heb. pp. 162 /.). Others
regard the motive as religious, an act of the adherents of the cause of
pure religion (Ki. Gesch. p. 320). The cause is really unknown,
and it is idle to conjecture. The section is taken from 2 K. 21''-'*
with V. ">> rewTitten. — 21. Twenty-tivo years]. If this age is cor-
rect, then Amon was only sixteen years old at the birth of Josiah.
XXXm. 21-25.] REIGN OF AMON 50I
McCurdy holds that Amon was probably acting king when his
father was in captivity, and hence older than twenty-two on his
accession (HPM. p. 389). The name of Amon's mother, "Me-
shuUemeth the daughter of Haruz of Jotbah," given in 2 K. 2i'»,
is omitted. — 22. And Amon sacrificed to all the graven images, etc.]
2 K. 23=', "And he walked in all the way which his father walked
and served the idols which his father served and worshipped
them." The Chronicler has abridged and changed this statement
because it is inconsistent with Manasseh's repentance, which his
own statement allows. — 25. The people of the land] the common
people in opposition to the courtiers who had conspired against
Amon. This vengeance may indicate that the people were favoured
by the conditions which prevailed during the reign of Manasseh,
as though the entire period had been one of quiet and contented
vassalage under Assyria; or it may only be an expression of the
loyalty so often felt by the common people for a sovereign.
21. 2 K. 2119 + naoi in Ti">n 03 nnVj'D lax ds*i. — 22. v2!<>] 2 K. 21"
+ vas ^S^— I'j'N Tnn-SD3 ^S■<1, which the Chronicler omits, for reason
given above. — 'ui O'-SiDDn-SoSi] 2 K. innirii vaN lay la's DiSiSjn-nN lajjM
onS. — 23. The Chronicler omits 2 K. 21^2 and adds this verse, an obvi-
ous reference to his addition to the account of Manasseh. — |1cn Nin 13]
(gB Sti i/ios (^ + avTov) 'A/Ucbs; ^ 8ri Afiwv 6 vibs, hence original (6
= IiSN 1J3 13. If omits ]iaN. Probably p^x Nin as w^ell as pcN M2
are glosses w^hich crept into different texts. — 24. maj;] 2 K. 21"
jicN nay. — inniD'>i] 2 K. ^SDn ns inin''i. — 25. 13^1] 2 K. 212* ■i>i.
XXXIV- XXXV. The reign of Josiah (639-608 b. c.).— The
history of Josiah contained in 2 K. cc. 22. 23, apart from the men-
tion of his accession and his death, consists entirely of an account
of the discovery of the book of the law and the subsequent reform.
The Chronicler abridges this narrative in certain points and
modifies, embeUishes, and expands it in others. 2 K. knows of no
reformatory activity on the part of Josiah until his eighteenth year,
when the book of the law was discovered; the Chronicler, on the
other hand, makes the young King exhibit special piety ten years
earlier, in his eighth year (34'), and in his twelfth year he be-
gins to purge the land of idolatry so that his reformation in
502
2 CHRONICLES
cultus precedes the discovery of the book of the law instead of, as
in 2 K., following the discovery. The reason of this change is plain.
Such a pious king as Josiah must be represented as pious from his
youth and needed not the special cause of the discovery of the
book of the law to influence him to remove idolatries. The
Chronicler has also omitted all reference to the purging of the
Temple in detail (recorded in 2 K. 23^-^), confining himself to the
single statement that he purged the house (v. «). This omission
may have been simply due to brevity, or because in 2 K. 23^ -« the
idolatrous objects which are removed are clearly those associated
with Manasseh, but according to 2 Ch. ^^^^ Manasseh himself
had purged the Temple of these. The narrative of the discovery
of the book of the law is also rewritten. In 2 K. 22'-' the only
ofl&cers mentioned in connection with the repair of the Temple
are Shaphan the scribe and Hilkiah the high priest; but in
Chronicles, Maaseiah the governor of the city and Joah the
recorder appear (v. *). The keepers of the door also have become
Levites (v. ', cf. 2 K. 22^), and the money has been gathered not
simply from "the people," i.e., those of the S. kingdom, but also
from those of Manasseh and Ephraim and all the remnant of
Israel. Also in 2 K. 22^ the implication is that the money was
derived from contributions made at the Temple according to
the arrangements made by Jehoash, who placed a chest beside
the altar to receive dues or offerings in money brought into the
Temple (2 K. 12^ ^ ). The Chronicler assumes that the money
had been collected by peripatetic Levites.
The breaches of the house also are not those of natural decay,
as is implied in 2 K. 22^, but specifically those of violence done to
the Temple by the idolatrous kings of Judah (v. "). The overseers
of all the work also are Le\ites, a number of whom are mentioned
by name (vv. '- ' ). These are entirely absent in 2 K. The account
of the finding of the book and the inquiry of the prophetess and
the entering into the covenant are given essentially alike in both
narratives. But the account of the reformation, since that has
already been assigned to the earlier years of Josiah, is entirely
omitted, with the exception of the celebration of the Passover,
which was a feature of Josiah's reform (2 K. 23='='). This is
XXXIV. 1-7.] REFORMATION OF JOSIAH 503
elaborated by the Chronicler in a description of nineteen verses.
The Chronicler also gives a somewhat full account of the death of
Josiah (35"-"), which is very briefly narrated in 2 K. 23"".
Sources: Ki. (after Bn.) (omitting the vv. taken from 2 K.) assigns
34'-' to M; vv. '-'^and ''- '■ to the Chronicler; 35'-8 (as far as people) to
M; vv. S"^-' to the Chronicler; vv. 'o" to M; vv. '^-^o (as far as temple) to
the Chronicler; vv. s""^ m to M; v. =" to the Chronicler. It is doubtful,
however, whether a Midrash source should be introduced. The passages
assigned to M contain nothing necessarily foreign to the Chronicler. The
following marks of his style appear in them: c. 34 in v.' ti'iT (1. 23);
c. 35 in V. 2 -icj? Hiph. (1. 89); in vv. =■ m ma;; (1. 81); in w. ^- "> npSno
(1. 42); in vv. 5- 12 ni2vxn no (1. 14); in v. ' Nsr: (1. 69); in v. » the use
of 3 in niSj-na (1. 69); in v. 21 idn (1. 4).
XXXIV. 1 f. Josiah's accession.— Taken from 2 K. 221 f , with
the usual omission of the name of the King's mother. — 2. And he
did that which was right, etc.]. Cf. similar statements concerning
Asa 142, and Jotham 272 Hezekiah 29^, but only to Josiah is given
the praise: And he did not turn to the right hand or to the left.
1 . a''j!r] 2 K. 22' r\iv. — oVt^nia] 2 K + npsan nnj; na mni idn at^v —
2. is-i-ia] 2 K. 222 Tn Soa.
3-7. Josiah's piety exemplified in his reformation. — 3. For
in the eighth year of his reign, etc.]. The narrative of 2 K. knows
nothing of this movement for reform when Josiah was so young and
before the discovery of the book of the law. For the reason of the
Chronicler's modification v. s. A reconciliation between the two
narratives has been sought on the ground that 2 K. described
the consummation of a reform begun at an earlier period, while
the Chronicler described the entire reform without reference to
chronology (Be., Zoe., Oe.). — The high places]. Cf. iVK — The
Asherim]. Cf. vv. ^- ' 14'. — The graven images- and the molten
images]. Cf. w. ■•• '. The former are mentioned in t^t^^K The
two may be coupled here together to denote every kind of idol (so
in Na. i'^ Hab. 2'8 Is. 488 Je. 10'^ 511^ Dt. 27'^). The graven
(carved) image was either of wood (Is. 402" 44'5 4520) qj- of stone
(Is. 21'). But the word (^D2, TDS) is used for idols in general,
even for molten ones of metal (Je. 10'^ Si'O- — ^' This verse
504 2 CHRONICLES
describes more fully the conduct of v.', repeating its terms. —
Baalim]. Cf. ly' 33'. — The sun pillars]. Cf. 14'' <". In 2 K.
23'* the mazzeboth, pillars, are mentioned. The hammanim, sun-
pillars, a later term, the Chronicler used, perhaps more readily in
connection with idolatry. — And lie made dust of them]. Cf. v. '.
In 2 K. 23«- '5 this is said of the destruction of "the Asherah" and
"the high places." ^hus also was the golden calf destroyed (Ex.
322"), and according to the Chronicler the idolatrous image of
Maacah i5'6. — And he scattered [the dust] upon the graves of those
who sacrificed to them] (v. i.). In 2 K. 23* the dust of the Asherah
was scattered "upon the graves of the common people." The
Chronicler's representation is more intense, a sort of retributive
pollution even of the resting-place of the impious dead. — 5. And
the bones of the priests he burned jipon their altars]. Cf. 2 K. 23"- -"
from which this statement of defilement and abhorrence is probably
derived. — 6. And in the cities ofManasseh and Ephraim and Simeon
even unto Naphtali he laid waste their houses * round about]. The
reform of Josiah (after 2 K. 23'5- 19) extended over northern Israel.
This had already happened in the case of Hezekiah (r/. 30'- s- "> '• '»).
The mention of Simeon, whose territory was south of Judah (i Ch.
4-* " ), with the northern tribes is due to the fact that it was reckoned
as one of the ten tribes forming the N. kingdom {cf. 15'). — Their
houses] idolatrous temples {cf. "the houses of the high places,"
2 K. 23'9). — 7. Cf. V. *. — All the land of Israel] the N. kingdom.
3. \-iSn^] (& Ki/ptoj' rbv debv. — 4. r:oS ixnn] 05^'' Kal Kariffiraffev
{}• — (TKa\}'e) TO. Kara. ivpbffUTrov aiiTOv (L — uv), but avrov in ^ shows
that the verb must have stood in pi. in original (6, as is found in *
Karearpe^av, which supports M. Some scribe of (^^^ changed the
number to agree with the preceding and following passages. The
necessary change from avrov to aiiruiv was made only in ^. — D''j?3n] cf.
14^ — Din^tn Dn2|in] read with Vrss. either '?n na,-? (Ki. BH.) or 'pn
'rS. — 5. a-'i-iinatD] Qr. dp — . — 6. an\-i3 nna] Kt. Dn''n3 -\n3, he chose
(searched) their houses, is hardly possible. Qr. Dnvnainaj with tJieir
swords, is only a guess, as are the renderings of the Vrss. (& Kal (iv)
T. Tbirois aiiT&v; HI, cuncta subvertit. Most moderns (Be., Ke., Zoe.,
Oe., Kau., Ki., Bn., et al.) read oninbnna in their ruins, but no account
is taken of 2 K. 23'=' upon which this verse is based. There Josiah is
described as destroying " the houses of the high places " (nman ipa)
XXXIV. 8-13] THE REPAIR OF THE TEMPLE 505
which were " in the cities of Samaria," the latter becoming in 2 Ch. the
cities of Manasseh and Ephraim and Simeon even unto Naphtali.
Hence it is probable that the account in Ch. referred to these " houses "
originally, and in so far the Kt. an^nn must be correct. in3, then, is
either a corruption of ^''^nn, i.e., and in the cities of . . . he destroyed
their houses, or of ■con, cf. 2 K. 23". — 7. ona'sn nxi mnaTcn hn] trans-
posed in (B. — P"'.^'?] not likely an isolated and abnormal inf. Hiph. with
the vowels of the pf. (Ew. § 238 d, Be., Ke., Zoe.), but is either an error
for pi.ni {of. V. ^) (Kau., Bn.) or should be pointed pin^ (Oe.).
8-13. The repair of the Temple. — Based upon 2 K. 22'' (for
main variations v. s.). — 8. The clause rendered in AV., RV.,
When he had purged the land .nd the house, is an addition to
the text of 2 K. 22^ and in this translation brings that verse
into conformity with vv. ^-^ The other proposed renderings
(y. i.) make the clause either an expression of the object of the
repair of the Temple or an implication that Josiah spent several
years in removing all idolatries from the lands. The fact that
only here is the purging of the Temple by Josiah mentioned by
the Chronicler favours the notion that the clause is a gloss {v. i.).
— Shaphan]. This name also appears in v. ^o^ as the father
of Ahikam, also of an Elasah Je. 29^ (perhaps the same Sha-
phan is meant). Shaphan appears also in Je. 36"'- "■ '^ as the
father of Gemariah and in Ezk. S'' as the father of Jaazaniah.
These latter two may have been identical with the Shaphan
here mentioned. The name means Coney or Rock-badger, and
has been taken with other animal names as an evidence of
totemism in Israel (but see Gray, HPN. pp. 103 /.; Jacobs,
Studies in Bib. Arch. pp. 84 ff.). — Azaliah] (2 K. 22^ -j-). The
Chronicler omits his father Meshullam, and Shaphan's title
of " scribe " both mentioned in 2 K. 223. — Maaseiah the governor of
the city and Jo^ah the son of Jo^ahaz the recorder] not mentioned
in 2 K. The names are common. — 9. The matter is stated differ-
ently in 2 K. 22^ There Shaphan took a message to Hilkiah that
he should "sum," i.e., reckon the total of the money received in
the Temple or, to follow a better reading, "pour it out" from the
chest in which it had been collected from contributors entering the
Temple; here Shaphan and his companion came to Hilkiah atid
5o6 2 CHRONICLES
gave the money which had been collected throughout the country
presumably by Levites {v. s. and cf. 24^ «■, where the Chronicler
has made a similar departure from the narrative in 2 K. 12, intro-
ducing Levites as collectors 24^). — 10 f. And they gave '] a
repetition of and they gave (AV., RV., delivered) of v. ', i.e.,
Shaphan and his companions with Hilkiah gave the money into
the hand of the workmen who had the oversight of the house of
Yahweh and these in turn gave it to the workmen who were working
in the house of Yahweh to mend and to repair the house (Ke., Zoe.,
Kau., AV., RVm.). This latter statement is made more definite
by V." : And they gave it to the carpenters and to the builders to pur-
chase hewn stone, etc. Another interpretation regards the workmen
who were working (D'^tl^y ^w'S il^S^iSn ''tJ'lV) ^^ identical with or
belonging to the workmen who had the oversight (n^S^CH "^tTJ^
ClpSDn), and renders: And the workmen who were working in the
house gave it to mend and repair the house (v. 'i) and they gave it to
the carpenters, etc. (RV., Ki. Kom.). The former of these two in-
terpretations is favoured by the parallel in 2 K. 22^ — Carpenters].
The Heb. word (Ctl'in) means not only workers in wood but also
in stone and metal. — The houses] the chambers of the Temple
((/. I Ch. 28") which the kings of Jtidah had ruined]. Whether the
writer thought only of ruin by neglect (Ke., Zoe.) or something
more positive, as is ascribed to the sons of Athaliah (24'), is uncer-
tain.— 12. And the men worked faithfully at the work]. In 2 K. 22^
faithfulness is mentioned in connection with the payment of the
money. — And over them were appointed overseers Jahath and
Obadiah, Levites of the sons of Merari, and Zechariah and Meshxd-
lam of the sons of the Kehathites to direct the work.] This is a
characteristic addition of the Chronicler. On the names of the
Levites r/. for Jahath i Ch. 42 6^ '") 28 (43) 2310 f- 24"; for Obadiah
I Ch. 27'9, 3=' 7' 8" et al.; and on the families cf. i Ch. 5" (6').
— And the Levites, all skilled in instruments of song 13 * were over
the burden bearers and were directors of the workmen doing every sort
of work: and from the Levites were the scribes and officers and gate-
keepers]. Not only were the four principal overseers, those men-
tioned by name, Levites, but from the Levitical musicians were
taken the subordinate directors of the work, and from the Levites
XXXIV. 8-13.] THE REPAIR OF THE TEMPLE 507
also the clerical employees and other subordinate officers and the
gate-keepers. The Chronicler is anxious to express how entirely
the work in every detail was under the supervision of the Levites.
When Herod rebuilt the Temple this notion of committing every-
thing connected with the sacred edifice to ecclesiastics was carried
even further, since, according to Josephus (Ant. xv. 11, 2.), Herod
caused priests to be trained as carpenters and masons for labour
on the Temple. The words all skilled in instruments of song, giving
prominence thus to the Levitical musicians, and also the last clause
of v. '^, may be glosses (so Ki. Kom., after Bn.).
8. ^.•'2n^ ^-ixn ns ina'^] (i) has been variously rendered, wheyi he
had purged, etc. (U, E Vs., Luther, De Wette, et al.). But such a construc-
tion of the inf. with V is unexampled elsewhere. (2) In order to purge
. . . he sent, etc. (Be.). This connection with the following words is
against the context, since the verbal object of rhzf is pin'?. Ki. Kom.
also renders thus, and after Bn. regards the words as a gloss. This latter
is plausible. (3) While purifying, etc. (Ke., Zoe., Oe., Kau.). This is
to be preferred (cf. Ew. § 280 (i). — rbz'] 2 K. 22^ -|- -[Sen. — ih^Ssn] 2 K. -|-
nsDn oStyD p. — prn'? . . . inic'pn nxi] wanting in 2 K. — vhSn] want-
ing in 2 K., which adds idnS. — 9. in3m] for the imv. r\'^y, 2 K. 22^. —
uhm] dhm of 2 K. was either misread or intentionally changed by the
Chronicler. — D^n'^N] 2 K. nin\ — -DiiSn] inserted by the Chronicler. —
'ui i^n] a fuller statement than 2 K. Djin dnd, v. s. on v. «. — onsNi] (g +
Kal tQv apx^vTuv scarcely arose through error in the Greek nor could
on:'! be original. Possibly the latter represents a corruption of an
earlier pyniyi, cf. v. ' i$\ — '^ ''2•>:^>^] Kt. '1 •'T'?') and the inhabitants of
Jerusalem also CH, ffi, &, adopted by Ke., Oe., Kau., Bn. The Qr.,
■lac'M and they (the Levites) returned, implies that the Levites went
forth to collect this money {v. s.). Ki. (SBOT. and BH.) prefers Qr.,
since the inhabitants of Jerusalem are included in all Jiidah, but these
are differentiated elsewhere, 20i5- is 20 246- 's. — 10. un''i] 2 K. 22'
(Qr.) injnM, hence (& Kal iduKav avrb = ms UHm may be original. —
n^-;] possibly "t'j; with 2 K., so Ki., but cf. i Ch. 2^^. — •'•yv;] 05, S>, 2 K.
iJryS is probably original, so Be., Ke., Kau., Bn., Ki. BH. — D-'ti^y]
wanting in 2 K., was introduced by the Chronicler to emphasise the con-
trast with the workmen that had the oversight, D^ipBcn. — prnSi pna*^]
2 K. p-1.5 nN ptnS. — pna*? f] Qal inf. cstr. of denom. verb p-\J formed
from p^2. — 11. un-'i] wanting in 2 K. 226. — a''J3':'i] 2 K. -t- om^Si. —
r^^ip'^] <&, 2 K., ''^v — 3''Xj?i 3xnD ■'j^n] transposed in 2 K. — 'ui nnanDS
2 K. p-'iT} PN prnS. — nnans] cf. i Ch. 22'. — nnpSi] Pi. inf. cstr. from
denom. r^'^p to furnish with beams. — 12. h^nSd^] an addition to the
5o8 2 CHRONICLES
phrase in 2 K. 22"'. — 13. Sjn] omit t (Be., Oe., Kau., Bn., Ki. Kom.,
BII.). — cnsjc] wanting in (6 and therefore struck out by Bn.
14-19. The discovery of the law-book. — Based upon and fol-
lowing quite closely 2 K. 22^". — 14. This introductory verse is
from the Chronicler. Its purpose is to renew the narrative taken
from 2 K. after the interruption of vv. '^ f-. — And when they brought
out the money which was brought into the house of Yahweh, Hilkiah
the priest found, etc.]. The natural inference would be that the
book was found in the place w'here the money was kept, yet the
connection may only be temporal: at the time w^hen, then Hilkiah
found, etc. — The book of the law of Yahweh by the hand of Moses].
The Chronicler has in mind the Torah or Pentateuch {y. v. '«).
The words by the hand of Moses are wanting in 2 K. The book
actually found was Deuteronomy, or more exactly the original
Deuteronomy, Dt. 5-26. 28 (Dr. Dt. p. Ixv., Ryle, DB. p. 598,
GFM. EBi. I. coll. 1080/.; others restrict the original D more
nearly tocc. 12-26, thus Comill, Intro, p. 60). — 16. AndShaphan
brought the book to the king and moreover Jie brought the king word
saying, etc.]. The awkward introduction of the book at this point,
anticipating the narrative of v. '*, has arisen from a misreading of
the text of 2 K. 22' {v. i.). The text of 2 K. reads, "And Shaphan
the scribe came to the king and brought the king word and said,
Thy servants have emptied the money, etc." (In the unpointed
Hebrew text the words " he came " and " he brought " are the same,
(Sa^l) and also "the scribe" and "the book" (l£Dn)).— 17. And
they poured out the money that was found, etc.\ The phraseology
from 2 K. 22' implies collection in the chest instituted by Jehoash
{v. s.). — 18. And Shaphan read therein]. A noticeable departure
from the text of 2 K. 22'°, which has "And Shaphan read it," im-
plying that he read the entire book before the King, but the Chron-
icler, assuming the book to be the Pentateuch, recognised at once
the incongruity of such a statement and thus changed it. The
reading was confined to portions of the book. In like manner also
he omitted from v. '^ the words of the corresponding verse in 2 K.
(22*), "And he read it." — 19. The law contained some message of
pecuHar horror for neglect of the covenant of Yahweh, probably
the message of Dt. 28.
XXXIV. 14-33.] DISCOVERY OF THE LAW 509
15. j}."i] wanting in 2 K. 228. — in>|i'?ni] 2 K. + Snjn jn^n. — ]s-Z'-]
2 K. + inwS-\|iM. — 16. -iflDri nx ids' n3m] 2 K. 22' nson fflsr N3M. The
Chronicler misread "^DV:;}. (Bn. thinks copyist misread noon.) — icnS
'ui] wanting in 2 K. idnS is a substitute for idnm of 2 K. 229b. — 17.
io\T'i] 2 K. ina;? wnn. — nin-'] wanting in 2 K. — i"' Syi anpDDn t^ Sj;
HDN'San lany] 2 K. '> n^3 oiipoan hdnVdh irj? ti Sjr. The Chronicler
differentiates noxSon it:';; and a^ipflDn, the latter being Levites (v. '=),
hence the transposition and the insertion of T' *?>'. — 18. 13 iNnpM] 2 K.
221° inN-ipM. — 19. •>ia-i] 2 K. 2211 + -lijD.
20-28. The inquiry of Yahweh through Huldah the proph-
etess.— On hearing the terrific denunciations of the law-book
Josiah at once resolves to consult Yahweh clearly with a view
of averting impending calamity, and he sends a commission to
a prophetess, Huldah the wife of one of the courtiers, and from
her he receives a message of doom for the city and yet of
respite for himself.— 20. Ahikam] mentioned elsewhere as a
well-minded courtier who defended Jeremiah on a critical oc-
casion (Je. 26=^) and who was also the father of Gedaliah
the governor of the cities of Judah after the fall of Jerusalem
(Je. 39'^ 40^). — 'Abdoti] in 2 K. 22'= "'Achbor." This latter
(meaning mouse) is more probably correct, since in Je. 26=^ 36'^
Elnathan the son of 'Achbor is mentioned. — Micah] 2 K. 22
"Micaiah." The former is an abbreviated form of the latter.
The prophet Micah was also called Micaiah (cf. Mi. i' and
Je. 26' 8 Kt.). — 'Asaiah]. (For occurrences of the name cf.
I Ch. 435 6'^ ""' 158- " 9^) This one is not mentioned else-
where.— The servant of the king] the title of a particular ofhce,
although we are ignorant of its precise function (Bn. Arch. p. 258).
Servant is used elsewhere with reference to a king (i) of royal
officials, Gn. 40" 2 S. lo^- * and (2) of common soldiers, 2 S. 2'^ ".
3-2 8'. — 21. And for them that are left in Israel] wanting in 2 K.
22", which has "for the people and all Judah." The Chronicler
characteristically introduces the remnant of the N. kingdom ((/.
V. 9). — Which has been poured out]. (^, followed by Bn., Ki. BH.,
has the reading of 2 K., "which has been kindled," which, since the
reading is the more unusual, is probably correct. Likewise, fol-
lowing (B, ^, with Bn. and Ki. BH., we should after 2 K. read
because our fathers did not hear * the word, etc., instead of because
5IO 2 CHRONICLES
our fathers did not keep the word, etc. — 22. Then Hilkiah and those
whom the king commanded*]. Again a reading of (§ supplying the
word commanded is to be adopted. — Hiildah] 2 K. 22'* f (mean-
ing weasel). — The prophetess]. This title is also given to Miriam
(Ex. 15''"), Deborah (Ju. 4^, the wife of Isaiah (Is. 8^), and to the
false prophetess Noadiah (Ne. 6'0- Women, thus, as well as men,
gave in Israel communications from Yahweh; yet prophetesses
appear not to have been numerous. — Shallum] (a common name,
cf. I Ch. 2<° <■ 4" s'' '• (6" '•) 9" et al.) possibly identical with
Shallum the uncle of Jeremiah (Je. 32^). — Tokhath] better the
reading of 2 K. 22'% Tikvah (a name meaning hope, also in Ezr.
io'5 t). — Hasrah f] 2 K. 22'^ Harhas f, the former probably is
correct. — Keeper of the wardrobe] (lit. the garments) either the
king's wardrobe or more likel}- the garments kept at the palace for
festive occasions. Cf. 2 K. lo- and on the use of special garments
at religious functions, WRS. Rel. Sem. pp. 452/. — In the second
quarter]. Cf. Zp. i'". — 24. All the curses]. Cf. Dt. 2?,'^-^\ For
phraseology similar to that of this verse and the following cf. i K.
Q6 ff. 149 f. Je. 720 ig3 ^2". — 25. Poured out] better after (g
kindled (cf. v. ") (v. i.). — 26 f . The words which thou hast Jieard
. . . ]. The text is in some way faulty. Perhaps the reading
was: Because thou hast hearkened unto my words {-') and thy heart
was softened, etc. (v. i.). — 28. And thou shall be gathered to thy
grave in peace]. Since Josiah was slain at the battle of Megiddo,
it looks as though these words were written before his death, and
hence are a testimony to the genuineness of the prophecy of
Huldah.
20. in^p'^n] 2 K. 2212 + jn^n. — pi^;] 2 K. iod;, cf. Je. 26^2 36'=;
^'y, -1 ^,S = ; -, ^. -I N is doubtless a correction from 2 K. (&, U, support
iH.— no'::] 2 K. n>o>a. <S> M(e)txa^a supports 2 K. — 21, Sniit-o iN-j-jn
n-nn>3i] 2 K. 22" n-iini Sj -lyai D;n. — n^-j] 2 K. nnsj, supported by
(^ iKKiKavrai, may be original, so Bn., Ki. BH. — ncc] 2 K. lycu',
supported by (S, §>, and adopted by Bn., Ki. BH. — -\3-'] 2 K. nji, (g
Tuv Xiywv, 51 verba, "■ fell out before nin>. — mn^] 2 K. nin noDn. — isjon Sy
nn] 2 K. vSj? (iK iji':';-). — 22. -^^'^•1] add icn with <& oh eiwev, so
Ew. § 292 b n. I, Be., Oe., Kau., et al. The Chronicler thus
avoids repeating the names of v. =» given in 2 K. 22". — nnn\i] Qr. Pn|-in,
2 K. nip.T. — n->Dn] 2 K. Dmn, the former is to be read Ki. BH. — pnto]
XXXIV. 14-33.] DISCOVERY OF THE LAW 511
wanting in 2 K. — 24. ^y nninon niS^n] 2 K. 22I6 >-\3n. — niS^n] ($ rois
. . . \6yovs = a'-na^n agreeing so far with 2 K. — iJoS iN-ip] 2 K. n">|1.
Ch. is more exact in the light of v. 's = 2 K. 2210. — 25. iT'apM] Qr.,
2K. 22"'nDp_''i. — inni] 2 K. nnsji makes a better contrast to nasn, is
supported by (S, and adopted by Oe. Ki., Bn. On 1 with the impf. see
Dr. TH. § 125. — 26. nycB' irs anain] taiien from 2 K. 22I8, a
harsh construction, but in (&^, #, S. In 2 K. 05*- 'AvS' uv -rJKova-as
Tovs X670US /uou, Kal TjTraXtjvdT] tj Kapdia ffov, U Pro eo quod [quoniam
in Ch.] audistl verba voluminis et pertcrritum [atque emollitum in Ch.]
est cor tuiim, i.e., l^a*? Tim nai nx njjca' -\vn ])}\ St. (SBOT.) anain
Ti^'r;::' nnSf -ib'n. Hpt. regards the words m3T icn a gloss to lyniyj of
V. 2'. K'\. Kom.,BH. ho\d a. lacuua. — 27. D^nSx •'Jd'^c] 2 K. 22i9nini ijdc.
— m3T nx] Q§» Toi>s XSyovs fwv = nai-PN is probably original; 2 K.
Tna-i ii;'N. — ra-^"] 2 K. + n^'^pSi nDtt'S nvnS. — "'JsS ;?jDni] wanting in
2 K, — 28. V3'i"' "^jJi] wanting in 2 K. 22-°.
29-33. The assembly, the reading of the law, and the
covenant. — A reproduction of 2 K. 23' -5, with interesting va-
riations in vv. 30-32 and a new conclusion in v. ^s. — 29. All the
elders of Jiidah and Jerusalem'] the heads of clans and fami-
lies.— 30. The Leviles]. The Chronicler substitutes these for "the
prophets" of 2 K. 232. — Both great and small] both old and
young (cf. 15'^). The assembly was a popular one, embracing
men of all ages and conditions. — The book of the covenant] i.e., a
book which expressed the 'basis of a covenant (cf Ex. 24'). — 31,
In his place] 2 K. 23^ "by the pillar," cf. 231^. — And made a
covenant] lit. cut a covenant, a phrase derived from the cut-
ting of sacrificial victims into pieces between which the parties
to the covenant passed (Gn. 15" Je. 34' » f); but there is no
reason to suppose that this was an essential part of each
covenant or took place on this occasion. An oath probably
was sufficient with or without a sacrificial meal. — Before
Yahweh] with invocation of his deity. — To walk after Yahweli,
etc.] Dtic. expressions, (/. Dt. 13^ lo'^ '■ 6'' 26'«.- — 32. And the
inhabitants, etc.] i.e., kept the law. — 33. The Chronicler having
already introduced Josiah's reform of his own kingdom early in
his reign (v. '), puts here similar measures in the districts which
had belonged to the N. kingdom. — All his days]. After the death
of Josiah in the reign of Jehoiakim the people lapsed into their
former evil ways (36=).
512 2 CHRONICLES
29. ID?*^.!] 2 K. 23' 1BDNM. The former is the original. — pn] 2 K.
r'^N. — 30. ''2B'm] 2 K. 232 ^2v> Sdi. — aSi^ni] 2 K. + ipn. — D^i'^ni]
substituted by the Chronicler for DiNi3jni of 2 K. — jBp ij?i SnjD] trans-
posed in 2 K. — 31. nnj;] ^ rbv ariXov = 2 K. 23' iicjn, cf. 2t,^'K — •
vpn] 2 K. vnpn. — htdj . . . idj"^] (6, 2 K. without suffixes. — na-yV]
2 K. D'pnS. — nnan] 2 K. + nNrn. — 32. nxdjh '?d riN idvim] 2 K. 23'
nnaa oyn So ibjJ.M. The last phrase iw the covenant may have fallen
from text of Ch. (Oe., Bn.), since the reading without it is harsh, or
while every one who was found in Jerusalem takes the place of " all the
people," jn''j3i and Benjamin may be a misreading by copyist for nnaa
(Kau., Ki. Kom., BH., doubtfully).
XXXV. 1-19. The celebration of the Passover. — According
to 2 K. 2321 -23 Josiah commanded the celebration of the Pass-
over "as it was written in the book of the covenant," and the
people responded and celebrated the feast as it had never
before been observed. This brief statement gave the Chronicler
occasion to describe the celebration of the feast in detail, espe-
cially in reference to the part therein of the priests and Levites.
— 1. In Jerusalem]. This was the significant thing historically
in Josiah's observance of the Passover: according to the Dtic. law
it was held at the central sanctuary in Jerusalem. Previously
the celebrations had been at the people's homes or at local
sanctuaries throughout the land (Dt. 16^). The Chronicler
derived v. '» from 2 K. 2321*. — On the fourteenth day of the
first month] according to the law Ex. 128 Lv. 23^ Nu. 9^
The month was Nisan. — 2. Encouraged them]. Cf. the similar
exhortation of Hezekiah (295-1' 30--). — 3. That taught all Israel.]
From the beginning in Israel the priests were the guardians and the
teachers of the law, and the Chronicler, in dignifying the office of
the Levites, assigns this duty also to them {cf. 17^ '• Ne. 8'- »). —
That were holy unto Yahweh] another expression dignifying the
Levites {cf. 23«). In P only the priests are called holy {DB. IV.
p. 93). — Put the holy ark in the house, etc.]. This command to the
Levites to place the ark in the Temple, and, since they no longer
have the burden of carrying it, to serve now Yahweh and the
people in making preparation for the Passover (vv. ^ '•), has been
variously interpreted, (i) On the assumption that the ark had
been removed from the Temple by Manasseh or by Josiah during
I
XXSV. 1-19.] CELEBRATION OF THE PASSOVER 513
its repair, the command was to replace it in the Temple and to
attend to other duties (so the older commentators, also Be., Oe.; Be.
held also that the Levites bore the newly reconsecrated ark upon
their shoulders at the celebration of the Passover under the idea
that they were bound to do so by the law, but Josiah taught them
that the Temple built by Solomon had caused an alteration in that
respect). (2) The language is figurative, meaning "Think not on
that which formerly before the building of the Temple belonged to
your service, but serve the Lord and his people now in the manner
described in vv. " f" (Ke., Zoe.). (3) With emendation of the
text (7;. i.), read: Behold the ark is now in the temple, etc. (iin.).
The meaning, then, is essentially that of (2). Since the ark is in its
place and is no longer to be borne, the Levites should attend to their
regular duties. This appeared trivial and a reader emended as
given in M — 4. After your fathers^ houses] i.e., after the clan or
great family divisions. — By your courses] i.e., the divisions for
service. — According, to the liriting of David]. The formation of
the Levitical divisions for service in the Temple was ascribed to
David (cf 1 Ch. 2;^'^).— And according to the writing of Solomon].
The final appointment and arrangement was made necessarily by
Solomon {cf. 8'^). There is no reason then why this statement may
not have come from the Chronicler {contra Bn.). — 5. According to
the divisions of the fathers^ houses of your brethren the children of
the people, and (for every division) a part of a Levitical family].
"Each great division of the laity was to be served by a sm.all
division of the Levites" {cf. v. 12). — 6. And kill the passover]. Cf.
30I6 where the Levites kill the Passover owing to the laity's un-
cleanness, but here no such reason is alleged. This looks as
though at the time of the Chronicler the right of slaying and
roasting the paschal lamb had passed from the laymen, heads of
the households (Ex. 12'^ ^■), to the Levites. If this was the case,
Jewish laymen later regained this privilege, yet Levites might also
slay the lambs. — And sanctify yourselves]. After the slaying of
animals the Levites should wash themselves in view of their further
duties. — And prepare, etc.]. Prepare the Passover for your breth-
ren (the laymen), according to the law of Moses {cf. v. i^). — 7. And
Josiah gave, etc.]. Cf. the similar action of Hezekiah and his
33
514 2 CHRONICLES
princes (30='). — Three thousand bullocks^ for peace-offerings or
sacrificial meals (r/. oxen vv. »• ' '2). — 8. And his princes] i.e., the
various officials. — For a free-will offering] corresponding to the
passover offerings (Ke., Zoe., RV.); better willingly (H, Be., Oe.,
Kau., Ki., Ba., AV., RVm.). — Hilkiah and Zechariah and JehVcl,
the riders of the house of God\ Of these three riders Hilkiah was
the high priest {cf. 31'^; Zechariah is usually conjectured to have
been the priest next to him, the second priest mentioned in 2 K. 25'*
Je. 52-' {cf. Pashhur a ruler in the house of Yahweh Je. 26'); Jehiel
is conjectured by Be., Ke., Zoe., the chief of the line of Ithamar,
which according to Ezr. 8- continued to exist after the exile {cf.
I Ch. 240- But it is better to think of him simply as the priest
third in rank (Oe.). On occurrence of the name cf. 31". — 9.
Conaniah, Shema iah, and Jozabad appear as names of Levites
under Hezekiah in 3112-15. On Nethan'el, for occurrence of name
cf. I Ch. 2'^ 1524 24" 26^ 17' et ah; Hashabiah, cf. i Ch. e"""' 9" et
al., very common; Jet'el also common, cf. i Ch. 5' 9". — 11. And
the priests sprinkled]. Cf. 30'^ — Now the Levites were flaying].
As in the case of the killing, this according to P would seem to have
been a layman's part {cf. v. ^ 29'^). — 12. And they removed the burnt-
offerings, etc.]. The Levites, after killing and flaying the paschal
lambs (v. "), removed from the lambs portions which were burnt
upon the altar {'rh'^T\ the burnt-offerings), giving these portions to
the representatives of families that they in turn might present them
to the priest for an offering unto Yahweh. No ritual like this is
mentioned in Ex. 12, but it must be assumed that the paschal lambs
were treated like the lambs of the peace-offerings, of which certain
portions of fat were burned upon the altar {cf. Lv. 3«-'5) (Be., Ke.,
Zoe., Oe., Bn.). — And so it was done to the oxen]. They were
treated in the same way. The fat was burned on the altar (Lv. 3'-^)
but the rest eaten {cf v. i^). — 13. The paschal lambs were roasted
according to the ordinance of Ex. i2'-9. The holy offerings, to wit
the oxen, were cooked otherwise and were either eaten as a part of
the paschal meal (Be.) or during the later days of the feast (Ke.,
Zoe., Oe.). The former seems demanded by the connection. — 14.
The people were served first. Then the Levites prepared their
own lambs and those of the priests who were engaged until night
in burning the fat portions of the lambs.
XXXV. 1-19.] CELEBRATION OF THE PASSOVER 515
r^^v;n (collective) burnt-offerings is to be interpreted as in v. '2. aoSnni
and the fat, defines the burnt-offering. The connective and (i) is ex-
plicative (Ke., Zoe., Oe.). Be. draws a distinction between the two
nouns and interprets the latter as the fat of the oxen which was burnt.
15. Cf. I Ch. 251 -«. According to Jewish traditions the Levites
sang the "Hallel" while the paschal lambs were being killed in
the court of the Temple (JE. IX. p. 553). In spite of all the labour
of the priests and Levites, neither the singers nor the gate-keepers
were drawn from their posts of duty either to assist them or to
prepare their own paschal supper. — 16. And all the service of
Yahweh on that day in preparing the passover and in offering the
burnt-offerings upon the altar of Yahweh was arranged {i.e., was exe-
cuted) according to the command of the king Josiah]. This is a
summary of the preceding narrative. All was performed as the
King had commanded, or the emphasis may be upon the King's
command, i.e., was ordered by Josiah. — On that day] i.e., the
14th of Nisan. Ke., Zoe., Oe., hold that the expression covers the
seven days of the feast agreeable to their interpretation of v. ''
(g.v.). — The burnt-offerings are to be interpreted as in vv. '^ '^ — 17.
The feast of unleavened bread]. Cf 30'2- ='. — 18. A copy of 2 K.
2322 with these principal changes: from the days of Samuel the
prophet instead of " from the days of the judges that judged Israel"
(Samuel was regarded as the last of the judges); and with the
specific mention of the priests and the Levites and all Judah and
Israel who were present and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. — 19.
Also from 2 K. (2323).
3. Dijnnn] the Kt., which must be regarded as a substantive, the
teachers, does not occur elsewhere in this construction, hence read with
Qr. and many mss. Dir^pn, those that taught, cf. Ne. 8'- «, so Be., Ke.,
Oe., et al. — '1JI |nx pk un] certainly implies some movement of the
ark {v. s.). It may be inferred from i Ch. 23^6 that the Chronicler con-
sidered this service of the Levites ended with the completion of the
Temple. Bn. reads '1JI jnx n:-i; Ki. BH. suggests that rmjp be
read for ns ij."i, cf. 1 Ch. 28^. Better follow (& (as preserved in i Esdr.)
iv ry diaei = nna and render, After that the ark was placed in the house
which Solomon the son of David king of Israel built, there has not been a
burden upon your shoulders, now serve, etc. On this use of 2 with the
inf. cf. BDB. 3, V. 1.— 4. uiDm] read Kt. ijisni with (& (Ch.), H, so
Be., Kau., Ki. BH., et al. — 3nDD3i . . . anaa] Ki. reads '31 . . . o
5l6 2 CHRONICLES
with a few MSS. and Vrss. — 6 . icipnni] Bn. strikes out, since it is wanting
in (S (Ch.) and since the sanctification should precede the slaying of the
paschal lamb, so also Ki. BH. doubtfully. But (S (i Esdr.) /cai rds dvaiai
read D'>a'-\pm {cf. v. '3). Since the Levites did prepare the holy offerings
for their brethren, the people (v. ^^), this is the original, hence omit i
before iron, also with CH (i Esdr.) and render and prepare the holy
offerings, etc. — 7. ti'ioi] cf. i Ch. 2731. — 9. in^jjoi] cf. 3112. — 13.
nin'7X j-] a word not infrequent in Arab, and Aram. — 15. nun] a few
MSS. and Vrss. '•nn. — 19. ® (Ch.) inserts after this verse 2 K. 2321-2'.
This passage was added in the underlying Hebrew, as is shown by the
transliteration Kapacreifi = KaS-qaeifx = D^ir'tp, not found in 2 K. 232^.
The older (6 version (i Esdr.) has another addition at this point which
probably represents in mutilated form the Chronicler's original text,
cf. Tor. ATC. pp. 83 /., Ezra Studies, pp. 87 ff.
20-26. The death of Josiah. — Much fuller than the account
given in 2 K. 23=^ '•, showing that either fuller reminiscences of this
sad event had been preserved or that a legend concerning it had
already developed. The Chronicler gives the following details,
which are entirely wanting in 2 K.: (i) Necho's message to dis-
suade Josiah from war, (2) Josiah's disguising himself and coming
to fight in the valley of Megiddo, (3) the wounding of Josiah by
archers, (4) the transfer of the wounded man to the second chariot
(Ba.).
Bn. ascribes the narrative to the Chronicler's forerunner {die Vorlage).
In this he is followed by Ki. The evidence is seen in the connecting
clause, After all this -when Josiah had prepared the temple, v. -'>. The
remainder of the section is ascribed by Bn. to the forerunner and
by Ki. to M.
20. Neco the king of Egypt] Necho II, son of Psammetichus,
second King of the twenty-si.xth dynasty. He reigned from 609 to
594 B. c. — To fight against Carchemish]. The writer here gives
the geographical goal, while 2 K. 2323 has the personal object,
"The king of Assyria." Necho, taking advantage of the tottering
condition of the Assyrian Empire, was intent upon restoring the
ancient Egyptian sovereignty over the Syrian provinces. — Carche-
mish] the objective point of Necho's march, the mod. Jerahis
(or Jerabus) on the west bank of the Euphrates, directly east
of the north-east corner of the Mediterranean, the ancient
XXXV. 20-26.] THE DEATH OF JOSIAH 517
capital of the Hittite empire and the gateway from Syria into
Mesopotamia. Two years later Necho was defeated at this point
by the Babylonian army of Nabopolassar under Nebuchadrezzar,
and from that fact the writer introduced it here. — And he went
out to meet him] possibly at the command of the Assyrians or
through loyalty to them; but since the Assyrian. Empire had
grown very weak and was near its end, it is far more probable
that Judah had for some time ceased to be tributary to Assyria
and that Josiah went out to preserve the independence of his
kingdom. — 21. Whether this embassy with its message was in
any way historic, or merely a fiction to assign a cause for the
death of the good King, it is impossible to determine. Probably the
latter. The writer saw in the message of Necho a divine warning
which Josiah did not heed (v. 2-). He assumed that a real revela-
tion from God, whom he would have identified with Yahweh, had
been made to Necho. The older commentators thought of the
command having come to Necho through a dream or a prophet
(on the text v. i.). — 22. But Josiah did not turn his face from Iiim].
He persisted in hostility. — But he disguised himself]. The story of
the death of Josiah appears to have been modelled after that of
Ahab. Both kings received a divine warning, both entered the
battle in disguise — evidently to avoid the threatened danger — and
both were wounded by bowmen and later died (cf. iS'"- 2'- ^3 f ).
Yet (g read and he strengthened himself {v. i.). — Month of God].
A real revelation had been made to Necho {cf. v. 2'). — Megiddo].
Cf. I Ch. 7'-". The battle was so far north not because Necho ad-
vanced to northern Palestine by the sea (a view suggested by
Cheyne, Life and Times of Jeremiah, p. 96, based on Herodotus's
reference to Necho's naval activity, H. 158), but probably because
with northern allies this ancient battle-ground afforded the best
place for resisting the Egyptian. — 23. For I am sore wounded].
Thus also said Ahab (18''). — 24. The second chariot] probably a
greater and more comfortable one than the war chariot. — And they
brought him to Jerusalem and he died]. In 2 K. 23" the King is
said to have been slain at Megiddo and brought dead from there.
The narrative in 2 K. has also been interpreted to imply that
Josiah sought an interview with Necho and was assassinated by him
5l8 2 CHRONICLES
at Megiddo (Ba.). This is unlikely. — 25. And Jeremiah com-
posed an elegy over Josiah]. This has not been preserved. On
the other hand, Jeremiah is said to have deprecated the extremes
to which mourning for Josiah was carried (cf. Je. 22'°). — Unto this
day] either of the Chronicler or his source; most likely the latter.
— And they made them an ordinance in Israel] i.e., a custom.
They were probably repeated yearly on the anniversary of Josiah 's
death. An allusion to this has been found in Zc. 12", but that
interpretation is very doubtful. — In the lamentations] not the ca-
nonical book of Lamentations, but a lost one. — 26. A combina-
tion of the form found in i and 2 K., i.e., And the rest of the acts of
Josiah (2 K. 23=8), and that peculiar to the Chronicler, and his
acts first and last {cf. g^^ 12"). — And his good deeds]. Cf. 32'^ —
The book of the kings of Israel and Judah] v. Intro, pp. 22 /.
21 . Dvn nnx y^-; n*^] Be. retained iH and rendered nicht wider
dick set du heute. Kau. inserts \'^!<3 after nriN, the latter being used to
emphasise the preceding pron. sf. More likely we should repoint nrs,
I will not come against you this day. Ki. BH. reads nrs ijn. —
'ncnSn n''3-SN]. The rendering of EVs. against the house wherewith I
have war, i.e., the house of my war, was defended by Ke., but is
awkward. Better read with i Esdr. mfl Sn, favoured by Be., Zoe., Kau.,
since this brings out the contrast, viz., it is not against you, but
against your enemy, that I am marching. — 22. u'Dnnn] is not supported
by the Vrss. C& (Ch.) iKparai^Oi} read ptnnn and (& (i Esdr.) iwex^ipet
read 2'i'n. The following verse seems to imply that the King was not
disguised, since the archers made him the object of their attack. In
the Ahab incident, the King was shot by chance, cf. 18". We should
probably read pmnn, so Be., Zoe., Oe., Bn. — 13:] (§ (i Esdr.) 'lepefilov
irpo(j)-fiTov. Read M. — Winckler holds that an original of vv. 21 f- has
been much corrupted and reconstructs as follows: According to v. ^,
Josiah is clearly the one who has received a command from God.
Hence after n^3 some words are missing. The original was some-
thing like this: "What have I to do with thee, King of Judah? Not
against thee but against the house [of Assyria, i.e., thy vassalship] am
I come. Then said Josiah: It is not my wish that I fight (■'ncnSj),
but God has commanded me to make haste. Halt [O Pharaoh]
before the command of God who has sent me, that he does not destroy
thee. And Josiah would not turn back from him because he had been
made to fight with him [u^nnn in place of tt'ijnnn] and he did not
hearken to Necho on account of the word of God [which he, Josiah,
had received]" K.AT.' p. 277.
XXXVI. 1-4.] REIGN OF JEHOAHAZ 519
XXXVI. From the death of Josiah to the fall of Jerusalem.
— The Chronicler had before him 2 K. 23^"'' 24", from which,
with much abridgment and some striking modifications, he took
vv. '■", but vv. '2" he freely composed, giving his own version
of the fall of Jerusalem with its cause and the duration of the
exile and the decree of Cyrus, which led to the return.
Ki. assigns all this chapter either to the Chronicler or from 2 K., with,
however, an interrogation against vv. "-i".
1-4. The reign of Jehoahaz (three months, 608 b. c). —
1. 2. For a similar enthronement by the people, cf. 26' T,y*. —
Jeho'ahaz] a younger son of Josiah (cf. w. ^- '^), and therefore
not the natural heir to the throne. His election was probably due
to his sympathy with the anti-Egyptian policy of his father or his
control by those who represented it. In Je. 22" he is called
Shallum, which was probably his birth name, while Jehoahaz
was the name taken as king. His mother's name, given in 2 K.
23^', is omitted and also the statement, "And he did that which
was evil in the sight of Yahweh according to all that his fathers
had done." — 3. And the king of Egypt removed him from reign-
ing'^ in Jerusalem]. 2 K. 23^3 mentions that " Necho bound him
at Riblah." The text shows confusion (v. i.). The words bound
and remove are very similar in Hebrew. — A hundred talents of
silver] about two hundred thousand dollars. — A talent of gold]
about thirty thousand dollars. This tribute was lighter than
that imposed by Sennacherib {cf. 2 K. 18'^). — 4. Eliakim means
"God establishes," and Jehoiakim "Yahweh establishes," thus
the two names were practically identical. Necho showed his
respect for Yahweh in giving him the latter name. — And carried
him to Egypt] where he died {cf. 2 K. 23^'' Je. 22'^).
1. in"'!:'^''] (g (Ch.) and 2 K. 23'" + ipn inu'DM, but the plus is want-
ing in I Esdr. The Chronicler probably omitted the phrase, since he
regarded this as a sacred function, which the people of the land were not
entitled to perform, cf. 22', also 23" compared with 2 K. 11'-. — aSiJ'Tiia]
wanting in i Esdr. and 2 K., probably crept into the text from the fol-
lowing verse. — 2. 2 K. 23'"' ^^ yin t;'j?ii nja'^o in^ri'' na Sai;:n icn D•Z'^
rn2N wy -uj-N hjD mm >y'j2, is supplied after this verse by <& (Ch.).
520 2 CHRONICLES
Since the Chronicler habitually omitted the name of the king's mother
and the passage is wanting in i Esdr., M is doubtless original. The
Chronicler probably omitted the statement concerning the King's evil
doing, since the opposition of the Egyptian ruler indicates that the young
King followed the policy of his father, the good Josiah. — 3. T'O im-D-i
D^riT'a onxD] 2 K. 23^' a'^mo i^""* r:;n in^^ n'?a-ia n^j nyia imosM,
which (8 (Ch.) follows, adding Kal fj-errj-yayev avrbv 6 /3a(Tt\ei>s eis
AtyviTTov. This appears to be a conflation of Ch. and K. 1 Esdr.
(the original Gr. being preserved in the Alexandrian MS.) supports
M against the reading of 2 K., but read 'n'7SD after a''iX2. This
is doubtless what the Chronicler wrote, and the king of Egypt re-
moved him from reigning in Jerusalem, so Be., Zoe., Oe., Kau., Ki.
Kom., BH., Bn.— .-IN l^'J>•M] 2 K. S;' Viy jn^, (& (Ch.) follows 2 K.— 4.
D'^tt'n'i mini Sy vnx a'piSx nx o'-isa iSo 1*^2^] 2 K. 23^' n^j 7\-;-\q ^'^:;11
V3N ini^'Ni nnn iniii's-i p oipiSs pn. 05 (Ch.) has combined the two
readings. In the ^ text the conflation is complete, i Esdr. has s^p-ini
instead of aip'Ss and no notice concerning the change of name, but
instead Koi eST^cre toi)s /jLeyiffrdvas IwaKeifM (following the order of
words preserved in CS^) = a'p^n"' a^ia' n.s idsm, which is certainly an
early misreading of a-pMni ^i^-y pn aOM. — in.s'aM noj np'^ rns rnNP pni
nnnxD] 2 K. as' pdm anso n3m npS rnsini pxi. ^ (Ch.) conflates, also
adds 2 K. 23'^ with but slight variations, omitting a^pMni and reading
tS'jjjn'? y-ynn nSnn in for insn nx y->-;n in. In i Esdr. slight changes
are introduced in order to harmonise with the misreading of the
preceding clause (v. s.), but otherwise it supports M.
5-8. The reign of Jehoiakim (608-597 b. c). — 5. Again, as
usual, the name of the queen-mother is omitted (2 K. 23 5^). — 6.
Nebuchadnezzar] a corrupt form of spelhng Nebuchadrezzar
King of Babylon, 604-561 b. c. This corrupt form is found in
1 and 2 Ch., Ezr., Ne., Est., and a few times in 2 K. and Je., v.
BDB. Nebuchadrezzar's father, Nabopolassar, was King of
Babylon 625-605 B. c, and on the fall of Nineveh (between 608
and 606) immediately began to extend his empire westward,
but the conquest fell largely to his son, who commanded the im-
perial army at the battle of Carchemish (r/. 35") 605, where
the Egyptians were defeated. Exactly how soon after that event
Nebuchadrezzar came up against Jerusalem and compelled the
submission of Jehoiakim, is not easy to determine. According to
2 K. 24' it was apparently in 601 or 600 b. c, the usual view.
(McCurdy prefers to place it immediately after the battle of
XXXVI. 5-10.] JEHOIAKIM AND JEHOIACHIN 521
Carchemish, HPM. p. 167, likewise Oe.) But after three years
Jehoiakim rebelled, and before the Babylonians had subdued his
rebellion, died and his son Jehoiachin came to the throne, and
after a three months' reign, the city having been besieged and taken,
he was carried captive with many others and much treasure to
Babylon (2 K. 24'-"). In view of these facts the statement he
bound him [Jehoiakim] in fetters to carry him to Babylon is strange.
It has been taken as expressing an intention which was not realised
(Be., Ke., Zoe.). (g, B, render and he carried him to Babylon,
as though Jehoiakim were held there awhile and then released and
permitted to reign again in Jerusalem. — 7. The statement of this
verse is not supported by anything in 2 K. With the preceding it is
without doubt an expression of a tradition, later given in Dn. i', of
an attack upon Jerusalem and the carrying away of a part of the
sacred vessels of the Temple during Jehoiakim 's reign. The
motive for the formation of this tradition, putting the attack in the
third year of Jehoiakim (Dn. i'), was because thereby a captivity
of seventy years might be obtained. But this early fall of Jerusa-
lem is forbidden by Je. 25'-', and all that is known of the move-
ments of Nebuchadrezzar (y. DB. I. p. 553). — 8. Book of the
kings of Israel and Jiidah]. See Intro, pp. 22 /.
5. aStt'n^a] 2 K. 2335 -I- r^^2^•\ JD r\^-\!: nj miat icn oa*!, so (6 (Ch.), but
wanting in i Esdr., cf. v. 2. — rn'?^] wanting in i Esdr. 2 K. 23'' omits,
but adds r.i3N W]} ns'N hjD, with which QJ (Ch.) agrees. The latter also
adds at this point a section which varies only slightly from 2 K. 24''', in
spite of the fact that v. ^ is dependent on 2 K. 24', another case of con-
flation.— 6. vh-;] 2 K. 24' has v?2>2. (6 (Ch.) omits necessarily after
its insertion (v. s.). — 7. Sjm] palace (rather seldom in this sense). — 8.
ISD] 05 (Ch.) + \6y(av rdv rifievGiv tois = S 0''B>n >"131 was inserted
doubtless from 2 K. 24^, and as in other cases probably in the underly-
ing Hebrew. — i Sn-i::"'] wanting in 05 (Ch.) as also in 2 K. — minii] (^*
(Ch.) and 2 K. 24^ + V7\2H ajj D■>p>^r^^ jdc'm, and the former has the
additional clause Kal irdcpr) iv Tav Ofa fiera rwv irar^pwv avrov, which
must have as the underlying Hebrew vnus DJ? ntj? pa lip'i, cf. 2 K.
2ii8- 2«; see Tor. ATC. p. 84. — I'dmh^] (g (Ch.) 'lexovlai, so also v. \
9. 10. The reign of Jehoiachin (three months, 597 b. c). —
9. Eight] eighteen (2 K. 24^ (g^L^ ^, Ke., Zoe., Oe., Ba., Ki.).
This latter is also favoured by the elegy of Ezekiel over
522 2 CHRONICLES
Jehoiachin (ig^-'). Yet the repeated allusions by Jeremiah to
the queen-mother suggest that the King was quite a youth (Je.
13.8 22=« 292), and it is difficult to think of a motive for
shortening the age, hence Be. regards eight as original; and also
Bn. as coming from the Chronicler's forerunner (die Vorlage),
and he holds the same also in reference to the ten days which do
not appear in 2 K.; yet eighteen is probably correct.— 10. And
at the return of the year] i.e., in the spring (r/. i Ch. 20> 2 S. 11'
I K. 20=6), Jehoiakim rebelled probably in the fall and died soon
after, and then in the following spring Jehoiachin was deposed.
Nebuchadnezzar sent]. In 2 K. 24'" « the city is said to have been
besieged by the Chaldeans, and Jehoiachin to have surrendered
and been taken, with his treasures, and the vessels of the Temple,
and the best people of the land, to Babylon. There Jehoiachin
remained some thirty-seven years in prison, where he married and
begat children (i Ch. 3'^ f ); but at the accession of Evil-Merodach
(561 B. c.) he was released from prison and given a place of honour
among the captive kings of Babylon (2 K. 25" «• Je, 52=' «•). — His
brother], but according to 2 K. 24" Zedekiah was his uncle {cf.
1 Ch. 3'^').
9 . a>ja' njiDtr] 2 K, 248 njty msf j? njoc, but d>d> ma-jn is wanting in
2 K. The original Greek of both Ch. and i Esdr. probably agreed with
iU. The addition of the ten days leads to the suspicion that an mtt'j;
was accidentally omitted after njinr and later inserted between the
lines or on the margin, whence it made its way into the wrong place in
the text. D'D' was then added to make the text intelligible. For further
discussion v. s. — a'^^'n'3] 2 K. + oS::'nia jnj'^.x na ttr^cni inx qi:m. —
nin^] 2 K. 249 + V2H n-jv tj-n '-33.— 10. vnx] (g (Ch.), B, B, V2x >nN;
2 K. 241' 1-n; wanting in i Esdr. The Vrss. seem to be corrections
from 2 K.
11-21.— Reign of Zedekiah (597-586 b. c.) and the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem. — 11. This verse is a copy of 2 K. 24' » with the
usual omission of the name of the King's mother, "Hamutal the
daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah." Zedekiah was a full brother of
Jehoahaz (cf. 2 K. 233') but only a half-brother of Jehoiachin (cf.
2 K. 24«). — 12. And he did that which was evil in the sight of
Yahweh] taken from 2 K. 2^^^^. — And he humbled not himself
XXXVI. 11-21.] REIGN OF ZEDEKIAH 523
before Jeremiah] a statement based upon Zedekiah's attitude to the
counsel of Jeremiah respecting the Chaldeans. Jeremiah advised
submission. Zedekiah through the opposition of the nobles and
vain hopes could not bring himself to this (Je. 21'-^ 34'"" 37'''°
38"-"). Yet Zedekiah was not really ill-disposed toward Jeremiah
iff- Jc- 37"- " 38'°- ")• Neither did Jeremiah speak harshly of him
{cf. Je. 34^ '•). — Out of the mouth of Yahweh]. Thus, according to
Jeremiah, came true prophecy (Je. 23'^). — 13. And also, etc.] as
though rebellion were a sin additional to the refusal to listen to
Jeremiah; but the former involved the latter. — Who had made him
swear by God]. Zedekiah was placed under an oath of allegiance in
the name of Yahweh. On the violation of this oath, cf. Ez. 17 '3-21.
— He hardened]. The subject is not God but Zedekiah (Be.).
— Against returning unto Yahweh the God of Israel]. His violation
of his oath and resistance to the advice of Jeremiah are regarded
by the writer as apostasy from Yahweh. — 14. In this and the fol-
lowing verses the retrospect has been held to extend backward to
the reign of Manasseh (Be.), but the conditions were fulfilled dur-
ing the reign of Zedekiah. A most graphic description of the pollu-
tion of the Temple is given in Ez. 8. — 15. Sent to them by his messen-
gers rising up early and sending] a form of expression frequent
in the Book of Jeremiah (Je. 29'9- 35'* '• 26^). — 16. But they
mocked, etc.] accomplished in the treatment of Jeremiah, who
was bitterly persecuted, and Uriah, who was put to death (Je.
2620-"). Other unknown prophets doubtless suffered in the same
way, since the reference need not be limited to the reign of Zedekiah.
— 17. The king of the Chaldeans] Nebuchadrezzar. The origi-
nal home of the Chaldeans was south-east of Babylonia proper,
on the sea-coast, and from thence they pressed into Babylonia, and
since Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadrezzar and founder of
the new Babylonian dynasty, was of that stock, Chaldea from his
time meant Babylonia. — And he slew]. The subject is ambiguous
but it is better to make the Chaldean King the subject (Ke., Oe.,
Ki., EVs.) than God (Be., Zoe.). — /« the house of their sanctuary].
The judgment is brought into definite relation with the crime;
because they profaned the sanctuary (v. '<) they themselves were
slain in the sanctuary (Ke.). Cf. the vision of Ezekiel (q'-")- The
524 2 CHRONICLES
Temple also was the last refuge or stronghold of the city.— 20.
Attd his sons] Nebuchadrezzar's successors. These were Evil-
Mcrodach, Neriglissar, and Nabonidus. The last two were usurpers
of a different family from Nebuchadrezzar, although Neriglissar
was his son-in-law (EBi. I. col. 452). — Until the reign of the king-
dom of Persia] until the conquest of Babylonia by Cyrus in 538.
— 21. To fulfil the word by the mouth of Jeremiah the prophet]
Je. 25" 29'°, where after seventy years the promise is to punish the
King of Babylon and to restore the people of Israel to their owti
land. — Until the land had enjoyed its Sabbaths] i.e., until the
seventy years of the captivity allow the land to enjoy the Sabbaths
(the Sabbatical years of rest or non-cultivation), of which the land
had been deprived during the previous history of Israel (cf. Lv.
26'^ ' ). Hence the Chronicler thought of a period of four hundred
and ninety years during which the Sabbatical law (Lv. 25'-') had
not been observed (from the period of the Judges onward) (Be.),
or in view of the God-fearing kings David, Solomon, Jehosha-
phat, who doubtless observed the law, the four hundred and ninety
years must be taken loosely (Zoe., Oe., Ba.). The Chronicler
undoubtedlv had the notion that "the land obtained rest which
the sinful people had deprived it of by their neglect of the
Sabbath observance" (Ke.). It must be remembered, however,
that the law and notion of the Sabbatical years are in reality of
late origin, belonging to P. — Seventy years]. The actual period
of the Babylonian captivity was less than this, since the first
submission of Judah to the Chaldeans was in 601 or 600 (2 K.
24') and the first proper captivity was in the first year of Jehoiachin
or Zedekiah, 598 or 597 (2 K. 248-1^). The number seventy in the
prophecy of Jeremiah was doubtless meant in the first instance
to have been taken symbolically. The literalising of it gave rise
to the story of the earlier captivity in the third year of Jehoiakim
(Dn. v){v.s.).
11. n'^irmo] 2 K. 24'^ -I- njaSs irT>cii pa Saicn icx d-*i. — 12. vns.s]
wanting in 2 K. 24", the latter adding a^->''ini ntp;? irs Sod. — 'iji nS]
not. from 2 K. v. s. — 14. •'ir] (g (Ch.) -|- 1 n-iin> and so Ki. BH.,
but I Esdr, Kal ol ijyovfievoi o^ toO \aov /cai ruv iepiuiv. — ':'i>";^] Qr.
hyji^. — 16. . . . ?\s'? v] cf. i4'2 and on jsx^ i Ch. 22-'. — 17. O'^t^j]
XXXVI. 22-23.] THE DECREE OF CYRUS. 525
Qr. ail — . — t'V^<^ jpt n'^vai nina Sjj] Q5 (Ch.) rod I,edeKlov Kal rds
iroLpdlvovi aiiTdf ovk Tj\^T]ffav Kal toi)s irpeff^vT^povs aiirQv dTrrjyayov.
B'C'^ occurs only here.
22. 23. The decree of Cyrus. — These verses are also in Ezr.
it-3a They are not the proper close of a history, but the introduc-
tion; hence their true place is in Ezr. i'-3». i and 2 Chronicles
originally formed with Ezra one work, and in the separation this
paragraph was allowed to remain in each either by chance, or
as an evidence that the two writings were originally one, or,
with less probability, it may have been appended to 2 Chronicles
to give a more hopeful close to the book (even as 2 Kings closes
with a notice of the release of Jehoiachin).
22. Firsi year] 538 B.C.; the date is taken from his rule in
Babylon (Noeldeke, Aufsdtze zur pers. Gesch. 22 a. i). — Word of
Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah'] his prophecy of the seventy
years of captivity followed by a restoration (Je. 291" «•). — Yahweh
stirred up the spirit of Cyrus]. Cf. the promises. Is. 41^5 4428
45' 0- 13.— 23. This is the Chronicler's version of the decree, since
Cyrus King of Persia is not the official designation of Cyrus
(Dr. L0r.i2 pp. 545/ ; Weissbach, ZDMG. 51, pp. 662/.), nor is
there any likelihood that he would thus have acknowledged
Yahweh. The historicity indeed of any decree on the part of
Cyrus for the return and rebuilding of the Temple has been
questioned (see Sm. OT. Hist. pp. 344 ff.). (Torrey in his
Ezra Studies rejects entirely the historicity of the decree.)
22. •'33] Ezr. I' ^DO.— DJi] wanting in (B (Ch.). — 23. >rhii nini
DTSTi] I Esdr. 6 K^pios toO 'laparjX, Kvpios 6 Ci/'iorex. — nini] read
with I Esdr., Ezr. i' ''n;, so Be., Zee., Oe., Kau., Ki.
ADDENDA.
In the Introduction, pp. 23/., it is said that the Vision of Isaiah
is expressly mentioned as in the Book of the Kings of Judah and
Israel. This is true according to M, 2 Ch. 32^2; but the text there
should probably be emended (v. pp. 493 /.), in which case the
Vision of Isaiah, in all likelihood, means the canonical Book of
Isaiah. This latter view is given on p. 493.
The section i Ch. 1-9 requires a few further words of intro-
duction. The genealogical tables serve to bridge the period of
Israel's history from the creation of man to the time of David —
a period which the Chronicler doubtless thought had been suffi-
ciently treated from his own point of view in the canonical books.
This method of bridging with lists of names or lines of descent
was derived from the priestly portion of the Pentateuch where it
appears in Gn. 5 and 1 1 in the genealogies connecting Adam and
Shem, and Shem and Abram. These tables also served to explain
the origins and relations of peoples, communities, and families.
This was largely the purpose of the original record of those derived
from Genesis. They arose under the conception that historical
beginnings were in the form of family life, and they embodied
commingled geographical, racial, political, and chronological rela-
tionships.
But these are by no means the only reasons for these tables. A
leading motive for their composition must be found in the stress
laid during the period of the Chronicler upon purity of descent.
A sharp line was then drawn between the Jews and the other
peoples of Palestine, with whom union by marriage had become a
grievous trespass (cf. Ezr. 9. 10). Certain families, we are also
told, were debarred from the office of the priesthood because they
could not furnish genealogical registers (Ezr. 2'*'-" Ne. 763-66).
Hence a genealogy must have been a most valued asset for an
, 527
528 ADDENDA
individual, family, or even community; and to provide genealogies
or a basis for them for his contemporaries was probably in the
mind of the Chronicler when he compiled these tables. Jews
claiming descent from any particular tribe or clan, especially from
Levi, Jerahmeel, and Caleb, of whom the genealogies are quite
full, and men of Ono and Lod and of other towns which are
mentioned, and the families of Jerusalem, doubtless received his
information with eagerness and favour. These tables, we may
believe, were choice literature to them, even as at present the rec-
ords of colonial families are to many persons in New England.
INDEXES.
I. ENGLISH.
Aaron, sons of, 127, 269.
Abiathar, 213, 270, 294/.
Abel-mayim, 389.
Abijah, 10, 369; address of, 375/.;
reign of, 373/.
Abram, Abraham, 70/.; descendants
of, 71/., 77.
Adam, 58.
Adoniram, 364.
Adullam, 188, 366.
Ahab, 395/., 414, 416.
Ahaz, 12; idolatry of, 461; reign of,
455/
Ahaziah, 11; reign of, 418^.
Ahithophel, 204/.
Aijalon, 161, 366, 460.
A'.amoth, 216.
Alemeth, 138, 146, 159.
Aigum-trees, 321, 357.
Altar of Temple, 330, 336.
Amalek, 74, 234.
Amaziah, 12; reign of, 440^.
Ammon, campaigns against, 237 jf.
Amorite, 64.
Arabians, 15, 383, 394, 417, 419, 449.
Arpachshad, 66, 70.
Asa, 10, 378, 416; reign of, 380/.;
reforms of, 384 ff.; war with
Baasha, 387 ff.\ victory over
Zerah, 382/.
Asahel, 88, 191, 290, 482.
Asaph, 130, 134 /., 220, 339, 408;
sons of, 275^.
Ashdod, 449.
Asher, genealogy of, 155/.
Asherah, 386.
Asherim, 381, 401, 437, 478, 495/-.
500. 503/
Ashhur, 90,92/., 106.
Ashkenaz, 61.
Ashtaroth, 142.
Asshur, 66.
34 529
Atarah, 93.
Athaliah, 11/., 163, 435; death of,
430; usurpation of, 418, 422/.
Azariah, 480; exhortation of, 384.
Azmaveth, i66, 196, 293.
Baal, Baalim, 116, 119, 164, 392,
431. 435-
Baalah, 205.
Baal-perazim, 208/.
Baasha, 378, 387/.
Bashan, \2i ff.
Bealiah, 196.
Becher, 146, 157/.
Beersheba, 114, 247, 403, 472.
Benaiah, i?i() f., 216, 236, 290,
482.
Benjamin, genealogy of, 147, i$tff.\
sons of, 171; recruits from, 198.
Beriah, 154/., 161, 264.
Bethel, 377.
Beth-horon, 141, 154, 353, 443.
Bethlehem, 97, 106, 188, 366.
Beth-shean, 1 54 jf.
Beth-shemesh, 138, 445, 460.
Beth-zur, 96, 366.
Bilhah, 114.
Binders, 256.
Book of the Kings of Israel and
Judah, 22, 446, 454, 493, 518, 521.
Caleb, sons of, 89 /., 95 /., 104,
108/.
Calves, golden, 368.
Candlesticks, 299, 332, 336.
Caphtorim, 64.
Carchemish, battle of, 516, 520.
Caterpillar, 344.
Chaldea, 523.
Chaldeans, 522/.
Chariots, 233/., 318.
Cherubim, 299, 327.
:)o^
INDEX
Chronicles, date of, 5/.; diction of,
2"] ff.\ Hebrew text, 36/.; higher
criticism of, 44 ff.; literature of,
44^.; name of, if.; order of , i/.;
plan, purpose, and historical value
of, 6 ff.; relation to Ezra and
Nehemiah, 2 ff.; religious value
of, 16/.; sources of, iT ff.; versions
of^37/■
Cush, 62/.
Cushites, 371, 383, 417.
Covenant, 511.
Cymbals, 215, 276.
Cyrus, decree of, 525.
Dagon, 182.
Dan, 247, 472; genealogy of, 150.
David, 324, 345, 414, 441, 468; ad-
ministrative officers of, 236/., 292;
appeal for offerings, 301; ancestry
of, 87 /.; army of, 290; buys
Oman's floor, 252/.; capture of
Jerusalem by, 185 jf.; campaigns
against Ammon, 237^.; censusof,
245 jf.; charge to Solomon, 257;
descendants of, 99 ff.; foreign
wars of, 23 2 jf. ; last acts of, 260
ff.; last assembly of, 295/.; made
king, 184^.; mighty men of, 186
ff.; Nathan's message to, 226 jf.;
plans of Temple given to Solomon
by, 298; prayer of thanksgiving,
229; preparation for the Temple
by, 255 /.; sons of, 13, 99, 208,
2^7; victories over Philistines,
208/.
Deuteronomy found, 508.
Eber, 68, 70, 122.
Edom, 71, 74/., 405, 412; cam-
paign against, 442^.; conquest of,
234/.; revolt of, 415; kings of,
77/.; tribal chiefs of, 78/.
Egypt, 62/., 519; brook of, 349.
Ehud, 146; descendants of, 158^.
Elam, 66, 283.
Elath, Eloth, no, 355, 448, 457, 459.
Eihanan, 191, 243.
Eliehoenai, 283.
Elijah, letter of, 415/.
Elishama, pedigree of, 94/., 99.
Elizaphan, 213.
Elkanah, 216.
Elpaal, 160, 163.
Enchantments, 496.
Enosh, 58.
Ephod, 218.
Ephraim, genealogy of, 153/.
Esau, 74.
Eshtcmoa, in, 138.
Etam, 105, 115, 366.
Ezion-geber, 355, 359, 413.
Feast of Dedication, The, 348/.
Gaash, brooks of, 191.
Gad, sons of, 121 ff.
Gad (prophet), commission of, 250.
Gate-keepers, 5, 173 /., 215; ap-
pointments of, 284/.; genealogies
of, 282/.
Gath, 232, 366, 449.
Gedor, 105, 106, in, 196.
Ge-harashim, 109.
Genealogies, primeval, 55.
Gerar, 116, 383.
Gershon, 127/., 263/.
Geshur, 91.
Gezer, 140, 210.
Gibeon, 163, 210, 225, 315/.
Gihon, 486, 492.
Gilead, 91, 120, 122/., 288/., 292.
Girgashites, 64.
Goliath, 13, 243.
Gomer, 60.
Gozan, 126.
Habiri, 155.
Habor, 126.
Hadad, 72, 77, 78.
Hadramaut, 68/.
Hagrites, 15, 120, 123.
Hakkoz, 271.
Ham, 59, 116; descendants of, 62
/., 69.
Hamath, 65, 205, 233, 234, 353.
Hammon, 142.
Hamuel, 114.
Hamul, 84.
Hanani, 277, 389, 411.
Hanoch, 58/., 73.
Haran, 96, 264.
Hashubah, 102.
Havilah, 62, 69.
Hazael, 420.
Hazar-susim, 115.
Hazazon-tamar, 405 /.
Heber, 1 11, 155.
Hebron, 70, 137/., 213, 366; family
of, 128; hosts at, 2oo_/.; sons of, 95.
INDEX
531
Hebronites, 288.
He-goats, 368.
Helah, 106.
Heman, 84/., 134/-, 220, 276, 278,
281/., 339; pedigree of, 130/.,
134-
Heth, 64.
Hezekiah, 12, 117; celebration of
Passover by, 471 ff.\ opening of
the Temple by, 463; reign of, 462
ff.\ sickness of. 490/.; wealth of,
491.
Hezron, 84, 86/., 92.
Hezronites, 86.
High places, 367/., 500.
Hilkiah, 502 jf.
Hinnom, valley of, 456.
Hiram, 321/., 355; answer of, 322;
exchange of cities with, 351 /.;
Solomon's message to, 320.
Hiram (artisan), 322, 334.
Hittites, 64, 319.
Hivites, 64.
Holy place, the most, 326.
Horses, 319.
Host of heaven, worship of, 495.
Huldah, 509/.
Hur, 90, 92, 105/.
Huram, 321.
Huram-abi, 322.
IDDO, 360/., 372, 378.
Images, 503.
Insignia of royalty, 428.
Isaac, 71, 74-
Isaiah, vision of, 22, 493; writing of,
22, 453-
Ishbaal, 165, 290.
Ishbosheth, 165.
Ishmael, 71, 166.
Israel, 74; sons of, 81/.
Issachar, 202, 475; genealogy of,
144/
Jabez, 98, 107.
Jabneh, 449.
Jacob, 74; descendants of, 80/.
Jair, 91.
Japheth, 60; descendants of , 60/., 69.
Jared, 58.
Jattir, 138.
J a van, 60/.
Jebusites, 64, 185, 251.
Jeduthun, 220, 225, 276, 281, 339;
sons of, 277.
Jehoahaz, 519, 522.
Jehoiachin, 100^.; reign of, 521 Jf.
Jehoiakim, reign of, 520/.
Jehoiada, 190, 201, 290, 295, 422,
428, 430, 433; covenant of, 431.
Jehoshaphat, 10/., 236, 416; army
of) 393 ./•; alliance with Ahab,
395 ff-! fleet of, 412; judiciary of,
402J/".; prayer of, 406/.; reign of,
391/.; victory of, 404/.
Jehoram (Joram), 11; reign of, 413
/•
Jehu, 411, 421/.
Jehu (prophet), 401.
Jerahmeel, 82, 87, 93, 272, 274.
Jerahmeelites, families of, 93/.
Jeremoth, 266.
Jericho, 238, 459.
Jeroboam, 123, 373, 377; army of,
374-
Jerusalem, 207, 208, 239, 372, 512,
519, 521; destruction of, 522 ff.;
inhabitants of, i6jff.; judiciary of,
403/
Jesse, family of, 88.
Jeush, 74/., 264, 369.
Joab, 88, 109, 185, 236, 239/., 247
/., 287, 294.
Joash, 11; apostasy of, 437 jf.; coro-
nation of, 424; reign of, 423^.
Joktan, 68.
Jorkeam, 96.
Josiah, 12, 100; accession, 503; cele-
bration of the Passover, 512 jf.;
law-book discovered, 508^.; ref-
ormation of, 503 ff.; repair of
Temple, 505/.
Jotham, 123; reign of, 454.
Judah, genealogies of, ^2 ff., 104 ff.;
immigration to, 367; recruits
from, 198; sons of, 84/.
Judges, appointment of, 402^
Kedar, 71.
Kcdesh, 142.
Kehath, 128, 211, 263, 264; sons of,
408.
Kenan, 58.
Kenites, 98.
Keturah, 71 /.
Kiriath-jearim, 97, 204, 205.
Kittim, 61 ■
Korah, 74/., 95, 282; sons of, 408.
Korahites, 196, 282/.
Koz, 107.
532
INDEX
Lachish, 366, 447, 487.
Ladan, 263; sons of, 286.
Lahmi, 13, 243.
Lamcch, 59.
La vers, 331/.
Law, book of, 393; teaching, 393.
Law-book, discovery of, 508; read-
ing of, 511.
Levi, genealogy and geography of,
126/.; high priests of, 127 jf.;
sons of, 128, 129/., 272^.
Levites, 172, 219/., 376, 435, 469/,
5i2jf.; appointed for service, 225;
teachers, 393, 5 1 2/. ; guards of the
Temple, 425; cities of, 140 ff-, 204;
heads of, 261, 26^ J'.; lists of , 272
Jf.; organisation of, 478; sup-
port of, 479/-
Lotan, 75.
Lubim, 371, 389.
Lud, 63.
Ludim, 63.
Maacah, 96, 151/., 292, 369, 374,
386.
Machir, 91, 151.
Magog, 60.
Mahalalel, 58.
Mahanaim, 143.
Mahli, 265, 274.
Malchiel, 155.
Manasseh (tribe), 123/., 471, 475>
504; genealogy of, 150 /.; re-
cruits from, 199.
Manasseh (king), captivity and res-
toration of, 497/.; idolatry of, 495;
reign of, 494/-
Maon, 96.
Mareshah, 95, 366, 383, 413.
Mattan, 431.
Megiddo, battle of, 517/.
Merari, 128, 263; sons of, 274,
506.
Meri-baal, 165.
Merodach-baladan, 492.
Meshech, 60, 67.
Methushelah, 59.
Meunim, 15, 117, 405, 449.
Micaiah, prophecy of, 397/.
Michael, 122.
Midian, 73.
Midrash, 22/., 378, 449, 458.
Milcom, 242.
Millo, 185, 487.
Miriam, iii.
Moab, Moabites, 113, 232 jf., 405 /f.
Moriah, 324.
Moses, 130, 136, 265; tax of, 435.
Mt. Gilboa, battle of, 180/.
Mushi, 274; sons of, 266.
Musical instruments, 215 Jf., 276,
468.
Musicians, see Singers.
Muzri, 319.
Nabopolassar, 520, 523.
Nahor, 70.
Naphtali, genealogy of, 150.
Nathan, 226/., 257, 308, 360, 468.
Nebaioth, 71/.
Nebuchadnezzar, 520J/".
Neco, 5i6jf.
Nethinim, 170.
Netophah, 173.
Nimrod, 63.
Noah, 59; descendants of, 77.
Obal, 69.
Obed-edom, 13, 206, 215, 217, 219,
225, 283, 285.
Obil, 29^.
Oded, 384, 385, 45S.
Offerings, burnt, 467/., 514; drink,
470; freewill, 482; holy, 514;
public, 478; sin, 467 /.; thank,
469.
Ohel, 102.
Omri, 146, 292, 419.
Onan, 84.
Ono, 160/., 163.
Ophel, 454.
Ophir, 68/., 355, 359.
Oman, 251/., 324.
Othniel, 108/., 290.
P.almyra, 353-
Parbar, 285.
Parwaim, 325.
Passover, 470 jf., S^-ff-
Patriarchs, antediluvian, 58 ff.
Pedaiah, loi, 103, 292.
Pelatiah, 102.
Peleg, 68, 70.
Pelet, 96, 196.
Peleth, 94.
Philistines, 63 /., 209, 417, 449;
champions of, 243.
Pillars, 381; before the Temple, 328
/.; sun pillars, 382, 504.
INDEX
533
Priests, cities of, 137 #.; courses of,
269 jf.; in Jerusalem, 171/.; list
of, 127 ff., 137; organisation of,
269, 478; support of, A19ff-
Princes, tribal, 291 /.
Prophets, 13, 397.
Prophetess, 510.
Psalteries, 21=;/.
Pul, 125.
Ram, 71, 82, 87, 93.
Ramoth-gilead, 396.
Rechab, 98.
Rehoboam, 10; cities of, 366/.; dis-
suaded from attacking Israel, 365;
family of, 368/.; reign of, 362 _^.
Reuben, ii&ff.; 123/.
Reuel, 74/
Rodanim, 61.
Sabtah, 62.
Sabteca, 63.
Sacrifice, human, 457.
Salt, covenant of, 375; Valley of,
' 235, 443-
Samuel, 184, 308, 515.
Sarah, 71/.
Satan, 246, 398.
Saul, 195, 199, 287; death of, 181^.;
genealog)' of, 165, 179.
Scorpions, 363.
Sea, the brazen, 331, 334.
Seer, 13, 308.
Segub, 91.
Seir, 74/., 405.
Semites, 65/.
Sennacherib, invasion of, 485 jf.
Servant of the king, 509.
Seth, 58.
Shallum, 100, 510.
Shammah, 75, 88.
Shaphan, 122, 502, 505, 508.
Shealtiel, loi, 103.
Sheba, 63, 68, 73, 122; Queen of, 356
/•
Shephelah, 293.
Shelah, 67, 70, 105, 113; sons of,
112/.
Shem, 59, 70; descendants of, ()Sff.,
69.
Shenazzar, loi, 103.
Sheshan, 94.
Shields, 372, 382, 400, 492.
Shishak, invasion of, syof.
Shobal, 75, 97: sons of, 105.
Shubael, 265, 272, 277/.
Shuppim, 150, 152.
Simeon, 385, 504; conquests of , 116
jf.; genealogy of, ii^ff.; princes
of, 116/.
Singers, 5, 133 /., 339, 506; as
scholars, 279; before the ark, 215
/., 220; courses of, 275/., 281;
families of, 276 ff.
Soco, III, 366, 460.
Sojourners, 255/.
Solomon, 9, 14, 99/., 244/., 260/.,
256/., 296/., 300, 313, 513; acces-
sion, 306/.; acts, 351^.; address
of, 340^.; appointments of, 354;
bondservants of, 353; cities built
by, 352/.; cities exchanged with
Hiram, 351/.; history of, 313/.;
levies of, 322/.; made king, 261;
ministrations at the altar, 354;
prayer of dedication, 342/.; prom-
ise at Gibeon, 315; sacrifices of,
348; trade at Ophir, 355; vision
of, 349.
Sorcery, 496.
Spear, 201.
Sukkiyim, 371.
Sycomore-trees, 293, 318.
Syria, 319, 461; invasion from, 438,
457/
Table-land, 450.
Tables, 333, 336; in the ark, 338.
Tadmor, 352/.
Tarshish, 61, 146, 148, 412/.
Tekoa, 92, 106, 366; wilderness of,
409.
Tema, 72.
Teman, 74.
Temple, age for service in, 266/.;
building of, 244, 320; cleansing
of, 465/.; completion of, 355; cost
of, 258; courts of, 335; date of,
324; dimensions of, 324^.; furni-
ture of, 330 /., 335 /•; guard of,
424 ff.; material for, 258; over-
sight by I-evites, 262; place of,
324; plans, given to Solomon,
298; pillars before the, 328 /.;
preparations for, by David, 255 /.;
by Solomon, 320 ff.; renewal of
worship in, 467 /.; reopening of,
463 /.; repairs of, 434 /., 505;
servants of, 245; workmen of,
258.
534
INDEX
Terah, 70.
Tiglath-pileser, 119, 124, 126, 459/.,
473-
Togarmah, 61.
Tola, 144/.
Trumpets, 216, 339, 465.
Uz, 67.
Uzal, 68/
Uzza, 206.
Uzziah, 12, 448; accession of, 447;
death of, 453; leprosy of, 452;
prosperity of, 449; sons of, 274.
Uzziel, 213, 215, 277, 466.
Virgin's Spring, 486.
Yahweh, angel of, 488; camp of, 478.
Zadok, 128/., 201, 213, 454, 480.
Zebulun, 473, 475; genealogy of,
145/-
Zedekiah, reign of, 522/.
Zemarites, 65.
Zerah (clan), 75, 84, 170.
Zerah the Cushite, 382/.
Zerubbabel, loi/.
Ziklag, IIS, 195. 199-
Zoreah, 366.
II. HEBREW
(Compare also pages 28-36.)
n^Sn, 99.
*??«, 459-
Sv^tTN, 158, 165, 187.
isb'n, 219.
r-ip nn-;ria, 224.
ah aS sSa, 203.
n^'^'ya, 99.
niSpa, 196.
p'^'i^i, 262.
PJ, 399-
D^7a^, 401,
P?TT-. 235.
n-iB'nxn, 106.
hn'^h, 106.
0'ti>2yr;, 395.
npr, 222.
15.:i, 453-
nin, 308.
pSn, 461.
Sicn, 86.
niu'Dn, 453.
|nsn, 86.
nis^xn, 69.
o^nSsn mn'>, 255.
nv:., 107.
J7JJ, niph, 474-
V>rn:
323-
nS, 199.
r^^'j'^, 481.
njirxianS, 214.
T ■ T - ; ' •
^\' ^^^i, 379-
n«S, 262.
jJD, 201.
i'7'?. 317-
Sa-i3c, 219.
m;ji?, 380.
mSpn, 358.
'i.?>:2, 323.
ptfa>Dr, 166.
-iy.xp, 440.
nipn, Nipc, 319.
S>'3 nn, 165.
Spa ano, 165.
i^D '?.v'>< I?F'?. 133-
D'll!?'?, 477-
awo, 303.
N^33, 308.
o'Daj, 317.
ninyj, 124.
nnj:, 106.
Sbj, 199.
"20, 364.
V!?, 37°-
■^IJ?, 203.
^''c';'^. S^, 211.
■i^V, 477-
lis, 303-
'rsS^xn, 108.
njx, 201.
o^jxvx, 328.
HNn, 308.
O^rNI, 200.
nn, 298, 300.
np'i, 201.
mbo-^, 323.
a'?'^, 474-
"cn?. 303-
I'J^V' 47°-
«3|n >-!r, 279.
no'-nr, 477.
E'^?', 303-
naVr, 286.
DnDj?C', 124.
P'-jan, 298, 300.
nDNjSs pjSn, 121.
%
I
4
Curtis, E. L. BS
Books of Chronicles. ^91
.16
v.ll •
fSUnM
:'4.\-!W'i
;;:^-Ato/fe;
-;:W1
ii'.VX
im
^M
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11