{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_71811/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_71811","id":"gutenberg_71811","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71811","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Chronicles -- Commentaries","Category: History - Ancient","Category: History - Other","Category: History - Religious"],"text":"The Books of Chronicles\n\n\n \u250c\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2510\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Transcriber\u2019s Notes \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Punctuation has been standardized. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Most of the non-common abbreviations used to save space in \u2502\n \u2502 printing have been expanded to the non-abbreviated form for \u2502\n \u2502 easier reading. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Characters in small caps have been replaced by all caps. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Non-printable characteristics have been given the following \u2502\n \u2502 Italic text: --> _text_ \u2502\n \u2502 bold text: --> =text=. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 This book was written in a period when many words had \u2502\n \u2502 not become standardized in their spelling. Words may have \u2502\n \u2502 multiple spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in \u2502\n \u2502 the text. These have been left unchanged unless indicated \u2502\n \u2502 with a Transcriber\u2019s Note. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Index references have not been checked for accuracy. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 The symbol \u2018\u2021\u2019 indicates the description in parenthesis has \u2502\n \u2502 been added to an illustration. This may be needed if there \u2502\n \u2502 is no caption or if the caption does not describe the image \u2502\n \u2502 adequately. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2502 Footnotes are identified in the text with a superscript \u2502\n \u2502 number and are shown immediately below the paragraph in which \u2502\n \u2502 they appear. \u2502\n \u2502 \u2502\n \u2514\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2518\n\n\n\n\n _THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES_\n\n\n GENERAL EDITOR FOR THE OLD TESTAMENT:\u2015\u2015\n A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D.\n DEAN OF ELY\n\n\n THE BOOKS OF\n CHRONICLES\n\n\n CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS\n C. F. CLAY, MANAGER\n =London=: FETTER LANE, E.C.\n =Edinburgh=: 100 PRINCES STREET\n\n Illustration: (\u2021 colophon)\n\n =New York=: G. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\n =Bombay, Calcutta and Madras=: MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD.\n =Toronto=: J. M. DENT AND SONS, LTD.\n =Tokyo=: THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA\n\n\n _All rights reserved_\n\n\n\n\n THE BOOKS OF\n CHRONICLES\n\n\n With Maps, Notes and Introduction\n\n by\n\n W. A. L. ELMSLIE, M.A.\n Fellow of Christ\u2019s College, Cambridge\n\n\n Cambridge:\n at the University Press\n 1916\n\n\n _First Edition 1899_\n _Second Edition 1916_\n\n\n\n\n PREFACE\n\n BY THE\n\n GENERAL EDITOR FOR THE OLD\u00a0TESTAMENT\n\n\nTHE present General Editor for the Old Testament in the Cambridge Bible\nfor Schools and Colleges desires to say that, in accordance with the\npolicy of his predecessor the Bishop of Worcester, he does not hold\nhimself responsible for the particular interpretations adopted or for\nthe opinions expressed by the editors of the several Books, nor has\nhe endeavoured to bring them into agreement with one another. It is\ninevitable that there should be differences of opinion in regard to\nmany questions of criticism and interpretation, and it seems best that\nthese differences should find free expression in different volumes. He\nhas endeavoured to secure, as far as possible, that the general scope\nand character of the series should be observed, and that views which\nhave a reasonable claim to consideration should not be ignored, but he\nhas felt it best that the final responsibility should, in general, rest\nwith the individual contributors.\n\n A. F. KIRKPATRICK.\n\n CAMBRIDGE.\n\n STAND YE STILL AND SEE THE SALVATION OF THE LORD WITH YOU, O\n JUDAH AND JERUSALEM.\n 2 Chronicles xx. 17.\n\n\n\n\n CONTENTS\n\n\n I. INTRODUCTION\n\n \u00a7 1. Characteristics of Ancient Historical Writings\n\n \u00a7 2. Relation to Ezra and Nehemiah\n\n \u00a7 3. Date and Authorship\n\n \u00a7 4. Contents\n\n \u00a7 5. The Sources\n\n \u00a7 6. The Purpose and Method of the Chronicler\n\n \u00a7 7. The Historical Value of Chronicles\n\n \u00a7 8. The Religious Value of Chronicles\n\n \u00a7 9. Name and Position in the Canon\n\n \u00a7 10. Text and Versions of Chronicles\n\n \u00a7 11. Literature\n\n II. TEXT AND NOTES\n\n INDEX\n\n MAPS\n Western Asia (Early Times)\n\n Palestine\n\n The Environs of Jerusalem\n\n Jerusalem (Ancient)\n\n\n\n\n PREFATORY NOTE\n\n\nTHE author desires to acknowledge with gratitude his indebtedness to Mr\nS.\u00a0A. Cook for his kindness in reading the first proofs and in making\nmany most valuable suggestions and criticisms, and to the General\nEditor of the Series, the Dean of Ely, for his very helpful revision of\nthe proofs. His obligation to Professor W.\u00a0E. Barnes is referred to on\np.\u00a0lx.\n\n W. A. L. E.\n\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION\n\n\n \u00a7 1: CHARACTERISTICS OF ANCIENT HISTORICAL WRITINGS\n\nUntil recent times the study of the historical records of Israel and of\nother nations of antiquity has suffered from insufficient recognition\nof the principles and procedure of ancient historians. It is obvious\nthat a great contrast exists between any modern historical work and\nthose books of the Old Testament which relate the fortunes of Israel;\nand unless there is a clear perception of the main facts to which this\ncontrast is due, the nature and value of the Books of Chronicles cannot\nreadily be understood and certainly will not be properly appreciated.\nIt is desirable therefore to deal with this matter at the outset,\nbefore proceeding to consider the special characteristics of Chronicles.\n\n(1) _Standpoint._ According to the modern point of view, a perfect\nhistory would seem to be a complete and impartial statement of events.\nThis ideal is unattainable, for even the fullest account must fall\nfar short of the richness of actual life. Moreover, it is imperative\nthat the trivial be distinguished from the important, and the facts be\npresented according to their relative values. A historian is therefore\nnecessary to arrange the material so that the events are seen in\ntheir proper relationship. Thereby, however, a subjective element\nis introduced into our histories. Life is so complex that two men\nconsidering the same facts may reach very different conclusions\nconcerning them. We cannot wholly escape this danger, but we do claim\nthat the historian shall consciously seek to present the truth and\nnothing but the truth. He must not deliberately suppress or distort\nfacts to favour (say) the Protestant or the Roman Catholic view of\nthe Reformation. A modern historian may be convinced that sin leads to\ndisaster, but he must not therefore write that a certain wicked monarch\nperished dethroned and in misery, if he knows that he died peacefully\nin his royal bed. If he wishes to enforce the doctrine that \u201cthe wages\nof sin is death,\u201d either he may turn to history and select incidents\nwhich support that view, or he may invent characters and weave them\ninto a tale which points his moral, or he may discuss the belief\ngenerally; but he ought not to publish as serious history a work in\nwhich, irrespective of facts, every wicked king is punished or involves\nhis land in ruin. We should count such a work an illegitimate use\nof historical material, unless the author gave some clear indication\nof its real nature. We draw a sharp distinction between history and\nfiction, and in the serious historian we demand fidelity to the truth\nas he sees it.\n\nThis modern standpoint is in reality the outcome of that more\nscientific habit of mind which insists above all things on accurate\nobservation of phenomena and on the subordination of theory to\nfact. But the duty of scientific thinking has not so very long been\nrecognised by the human mind, and in former days many things were\nlegitimate and natural which would not be so now. The moment we make\nallowance for our mental environment, we can conceive that there might\nbe other ideas than our own as to what constitutes the use and abuse\nof historical records. To us the facts are primary, and the lessons\nthey seem to teach must be accepted, whether they suit our wishes or\nnot. But an ancient writer was not dominated by that maxim. Supposing\nhe desired to teach that \u201cVirtue is rewarded,\u201d he _might_ consider\nthat an excellent way of enforcing his theory was not only to use the\nnarratives of the past, but to mould and modify them as best suited his\nobject. History might be made the tool of his conviction, and the tool\nbe shaped to assist his purpose. If it is hard for us to realise that\nsuch a procedure was legitimate _for him_, that is simply due to the\ndifficulty we have in being anything except the children of our own age.\n\nThe earliest historical records of Israel were not attempts to write\na continuous history of the people, but popular tales and songs\ncommemorating such deeds of the people or its heroes as had made a\nprofound impression on the popular imagination. An excellent example is\nthe famous Song of Deborah in Judges v. Records of this type were long\ntransmitted orally, but eventually were gathered together into written\ncollections, such as the Book of Jashar, referred to by the canonical\nwriters (see Joshua x. 13, 2 Samuel i. 18). As national history\nlengthened out and State records accumulated in connection with palace\nand temple, the idea would finally arise of combining these with\nthe popular memories so as to form a connected historical narrative.\nBut the motive which prompted the formation of such accounts was not\nscientific interest nor even perhaps curiosity to ascertain the exact\ncourse of events, but the desire to interest, to instruct, and above\nall to edify contemporary thought and life. Broadly, we may distinguish\ntwo types of ancient historical writing; first, the _descriptive_\nnarrative in which events were recorded on account of their intense\nhuman interest, and, secondly, the _didactic_, where the older\ndescriptive tales and any other available material were selected,\nrelated, and built into a unity in such fashion as might best serve to\nbring out the religious, moral, or political lessons which they seem to\nteach or which the writer was anxious to impress upon his generation.\nThe books of Samuel\u2012Kings and of Chronicles both belong to the didactic\ntype\u00b9. Thus, they contain many stories (e.g. the _details_ of Jehu\u2019s\nrevolution in Kings) which teach no special lesson but are recorded\nfor their intrinsic interest; and also much annalistic record of fact.\nBut this material has been welded together by a writer or writers who\nwere supremely interested in the religious condition of their people,\nwho believed that the character and purpose of God were manifest in the\nvicissitudes of their national history, and who desired to make the\nethical and spiritual import of that history clear to their fellow-men.\nHence in their present form their works are not scientific records but\nrather what may be termed \u201chistory with a motive.\u201d For instance, the\nspace given to the tales about Elisha the prophet compared with the\nbrief allusion to Omri King of Israel is entirely disproportionate\nto their respective values in the _political_ sphere. The books of\nSamuel and Kings are practical and powerful appeals to history in the\ninterests of religious faith. The same is true of Chronicles, and to an\neven greater degree, because Chronicles belongs to a later period than\nSamuel\u2012Kings (see \u00a7\u00a03), when the religious convictions of Israel were\nfelt with extraordinary intensity, and could be expressed in accordance\nwith certain precise theological beliefs.\n\n \u00b9 That _both_ Samuel\u2012Kings and Chronicles can be classed as\n didactic does not imply that they do not differ greatly in\n character: the former books are \u201cprophetic\u201d and national,\n relating God\u2019s dealings with the nation as a whole, whilst\n Chronicles gives an essentially priestly and ecclesiastical\n view of the history.\n\n(2) _Method: the treatment of \u201csources.\u201d_ It is of no less importance\nto realise something of the difference of method between ancient and\nmodern historians, particularly as regards their treatment of \u201csources.\u201d\n\nFor all that lies beyond his personal experience the historian is,\nof course, dependent on sources, documentary or otherwise. The modern\nwriter recognises the duty of testing and verifying the accuracy of\nthe sources he uses for his narrative, and in producing his own account\nof affairs he is expected, where desirable, to state the sources upon\nwhich he has relied. The ancient historian also made use of sources,\nbut (1)\u00a0he used them uncritically, with little or no anxiety concerning\ntheir accuracy, and (2)\u00a0it was his custom simply to select from the\navailable material any passages, long or short, even words or phrases,\nwhich served his purpose, and to incorporate these in his work,\nfrequently without any indication of the borrowing. Only in certain\ninstances was the source precisely referred to. Moreover (3)\u00a0the\nutmost freedom was exercised in dealing with the passages thus chosen.\nSometimes they were reproduced word for word; at other times they\nwere partially or wholly transformed to suit the new context. This may\nseem an unwarrantable procedure to us, but one has only to examine the\nactual instances of these adaptations or transformations of unnamed\nsources to perceive that the ancient\u00b9 writer has acted in perfect\ngood faith, with no suspicion that the manipulation was in any way\nblameworthy. How indeed could it have been otherwise? The science of\nliterary criticism was unknown, \u201cnotions of literary propriety and\nplagiarism had not been thought of, and writers who advanced no\npretensions to originality for themselves were guilty of no imposture\nwhen they borrowed without acknowledgement from their predecessors\u201d\n(Skinner, _Kings_, p. 7).\n\n \u00b9 Nor need one go back to antiquity for an instance. Most\n instructive examples of composite narrative compiled\n uncritically but quite innocently by mediaeval chroniclers\n from earlier sources may be found in Chapman\u2019s _Introduction\n to the Pentateuch_ (in this series), pp. 260 ff. Compare\n also an illustration from Arabic historical writings given\n by A.\u00a0A. Bevan in _Cambridge Biblical Essays_, pp. 12 ff.\n\nFor us there is both gain and loss in these methods of the ancient\nwriters, (a)\u00a0Loss\u2015\u2015because the continual adaptation of old tradition\nhas sometimes produced changes so great that it is difficult or even\nimpossible to discover now what was the actual course of events. By the\nexercise of care and by the diligent application of the principles of\nliterary research the loss thus occasioned can be greatly diminished,\nparticularly where different accounts of the same period have\nsurvived\u2015\u2015e.g. in the parallel history of Judah in Samuel\u2012Kings and\nin Chronicles. Not only do the two versions facilitate the task of\nrecovering the actual history, but each version throws light upon the\norigin and nature of the other. (b)\u00a0On the other hand, the practice\nof incorporating passages of older narratives in the text is a great\ngain. It is, of course, unfortunate that the writers did not more\ncarefully indicate the various sources they happened to be using;\nbut constantly\u2015\u2015thanks to idiosyncrasies of style, language, and\nthought\u2015\u2015we are able to analyse the composite whole into its component\nparts. From the study of the separate sources thus revealed we gain\ninvaluable information which would have been lost to us had the later\nwriter (or rather, compiler and editor) given his version of the\nhistory entirely in his own words.\n\n(3) _The absence of the idea of Development._ One other feature of the\nancient writers, at least of the chroniclers of Israel, is of singular\ninterest, and deserves special attention: it might be described as a\nfeature of their temperament or of their mental environment. The idea\nof _growth_ has become familiar to us, and we recognise that there has\nbeen a process of development in our religious and social institutions.\nWe are content to trace the seeds of the present in the past. But\nthe feeling of antiquity was apparently different. In Israel, at\nleast, there was a tendency to suppose that the cherished system and\norganisations of the present had sprung into existence, as it were,\n_full-grown_ at some great moment of the past. For example, by the\nChronicler\u2019s time, the whole body of law and ritual embodied in the\nfinal form of the Pentateuch had come to be ascribed in its entirety\nto Moses, whereas historical and literary evidence demonstrates\nbeyond all question that the system of Jewish worship and law was a\ngradual growth of which the stages can be traced with considerable\nclearness. Similarly, many features in the organisation of the Temple\nministrants\u2015\u2015the Priests, Levites, etc.\u2015\u2015came into existence only\nin post-exilic days; but the whole system as it appeared in the\nChronicler\u2019s time was believed by him, and doubtless also by his\ncontemporaries, to have originated with King David. Indeed, it is\nvery probable that the ancients felt it so natural and so necessary to\njustify important customs and institutions by giving them the sanction\nof an ancient and honourable origin, that occasionally the very ideals\nof the present were represented as facts of the past. The converse of\nthis tendency was also in force. As the present sought the support of\nthe authority of the past, so the past could only continue to be deemed\nimportant provided it conformed to some extent with the beliefs and\nideals of the present. Ideas change and expand. Thus it was quite\nimpossible in the Chronicler\u2019s time to represent the age of David and\nSolomon as great and glorious unless the moderate figures given in\nKings were altered to correspond with the ideas of men accustomed to\nthink of the mighty armies of the Persian monarchs or of Alexander\nthe Great. As Kuenen says, \u201cIn ancient times, and specifically in\nIsrael, the sense of historic continuity could only be preserved by\nthe constant compliance on the part of the past with the requirements\nof the present, that is to say by the constant renovation and\ntransformation of the past. This may be called the Law of religious\nhistoriography\u201d (_The Modern Review_, vol. i. [1880], p. 705).\n\nOne consequence of the first importance follows from this fact. An\nancient historical writing often records unconsciously far more than\nthe history of the period it purports to describe. Since much in it\nwhich is ascribed to a past age in reality reflects the conditions of\nthe present, it follows that the work _as a whole_ may be an invaluable\ncommentary on the author\u2019s own period. By taking into account this\nlaw of religious historiography, by studying the writer\u2019s method of\ncompilation, his use and manipulation of sources and the additions he\nhas himself made to the story, we shall find in the completed book a\nmirror of the thoughts, the ideals, and the conditions of the age when\nit was produced.\n\nJustification for these remarks can be drawn not only from the writings\nof the Old Testament but also from the study of ancient literature\nin general. Nowhere, however, are the principles and characteristics\nwhich we have outlined more clearly exemplified than in the books of\nChronicles. They are the key to the comprehension of Chronicles; and,\nif they are borne in mind, what is generally considered a somewhat dull\nbook of the Bible will be seen to be one of the most instructive pieces\nof ancient literature. At the same time, we shall be in a position to\nperceive and appreciate the religious enthusiasm which animated the\nChronicler.\n\n\n \u00a7 2. RELATION TO EZRA AND NEHEMIAH\n\nIt is well known that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah were originally\none book; but further it is certain that Chronicles has been\nartificially separated from them, and that the three books,\nChronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah, were once a continuous work. The reasons\nupon which this conclusion is based are as follows:\n\n(1) The ending of Chronicles and the beginning of Ezra are the same (2\nChronicles xxxvi. 22 f. = Ezra i. 1\u20123a), i.e. after the separation was\nmade between Chronicles and Ezra\u2012Nehemiah the opening verses of Ezra\n(recording the proclamation of Cyrus permitting the Jews to return)\nwere retained, or perhaps one should say, were added by someone who was\naware of the original continuity of Chronicles with Ezra\u2012Nehemiah and\nwho was anxious that Chronicles should end in a hopeful strain (see\nnote on 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 23). The desirability of securing a hopeful\nconclusion is much more obvious in the Hebrew than in the English Bible,\nfor, whereas in the English order Ezra immediately follows Chronicles,\nin the Hebrew Canon Ezra and Nehemiah are made to precede Chronicles,\nand Chronicles is actually the _last_ book of the Hebrew Bible. (On the\nreason for this order in the Hebrew, and generally on the separation\nof Chronicles from Ezra\u2012Nehemiah, see \u00a7\u00a09, _Position in the Canon_, ad\nfin.)\n\n(2) The same general standpoint and the same special interests are\nfound both in Chronicles and Ezra\u2012Nehemiah to a remarkable degree. In\nparticular, attention may be called to the following points:\n\n (a) The same fondness for lists and genealogies is shown in both\n works; compare e.g. 1 Chronicles xii. with Ezra ii. _or_\n Nehemiah iii.; and 2 Chronicles xxxi. 16\u201219 with Nehemiah\n vii. 63\u201265.\n\n (b) The same intense interest in religious festivals and\n institutions; compare 1 Chronicles xv., xvi.; 2 Chronicles\n v.\u2012vii., xxix., xxx., xxxv. 1\u201219, with Ezra iii., vi. 16\u201222;\n Nehemiah viii.\n\n (c) Three classes of Temple attendants, viz. Levites, singers,\n and porters, which are barely mentioned in the rest of the\n Old Testament, receive a great deal of notice both in\n Chronicles and in Ezra\u2012Nehemiah.\n\n(3) The same style and diction are found in both works (excepting of\ncourse in such sentences and passages as are transcribed from older\nsources). Characteristic phrases are the following:\n\n (a) \u201cFathers\u2019 houses\u201d; compare 1 Chronicles vii. 2, note.\n\n (b) \u201cThe house of God,\u201d very frequently in Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah\n in place of the usual \u201chouse of the LORD\u201d (Jehovah). With\n this compare the avoidance of the use of the name Jehovah\n (Jahveh) in such places as 2 Chronicles xvii. 4 (compare\n Authorized Version with Revised Version), xx. 12, 30; Ezra\n viii. 18, 21.\n\n (c) \u201cgenealogy\u201d (\u201creckon by genealogy\u201d); compare 1 Chronicles\n v. 17, note; Ezra ii. 62.\n\n (d) \u201cto oversee\u201d; 1 Chronicles xxiii. 4; 2 Chronicles ii. 2\n [ii. 1 Hebrew]; Ezra iii. 8 (Revised Version \u201cto have the\n oversight\u201d).\n\n (e) \u201cwillingly offer\u201d; 1 Chronicles xxix. 14; Ezra i. 6.\n\nThese are merely a few instances out of very many which might be given.\nThis similarity of style and language is far more striking in the\nHebrew (compare \u00a7\u00a03,\u00a0C, and for full particulars the long list in\nCurtis, _Chronicles_, pp. 27 ff.).\n\nWhen fully stated, the evidence indicated under (2) and (3) above is of\na convincing character, and the conclusion that Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah\nwere at one time a single work should be unhesitatingly adopted.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a03. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP\n\n(1) _Date and Unity._ The scope of our inquiry in this section requires\nto be defined with some care. In dealing with any work which is chiefly\na compilation of older material, it is necessary clearly to distinguish\nbetween the dates of the various sources which can be recognised or\nsurmised and the dates of the writer or writers who have effected the\ncompilation. When we examine the structure of Chronicles its composite\nnature is at once evident. Many long and important passages have been\ntaken, with or without adaptation, directly from the existing books\nof Scripture. The date of all such passages, of course, falls to be\nconsidered in the commentaries on Samuel or Kings or wherever their\noriginal setting may be. The remainder of Chronicles presents an\nintricate but interesting problem. It has been held that there are no\nsources involved in this remaining portion but that the whole is the\nfree composition of the writer who quoted or adapted the passages from\nearlier books of Scripture referred to above. According to the view\ntaken in this volume, sources other than these \u201ccanonical\u201d books were\nutilised in the formation of Chronicles, although for reasons suggested\nin \u00a7\u00a05 (q.v., pp. xxxvi f.) such sources are not easy to distinguish\nfrom the work of the compiler himself. The little which can be\nsaid regarding the origin and history of these supposed sources may\nconveniently be reserved for the section dealing with the _Sources_\n(\u00a7\u00a05). The question, therefore, which is before us in this section is\nthe date of the editorial process to which we owe the present form of\nChronicles. Fortunately the answer is simplified by one important fact,\nnamely the remarkable homogeneity of Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah. To such\na degree are these books characterised by unity of style, vocabulary,\nstandpoint and purpose (see below; also \u00a7\u00a02 and \u00a7\u00a06), that we may\nsafely conclude they are essentially the product of one mind: they have\nreached _substantially_ their present form in the course of a single\neditorial process. Conceivably the work was achieved by a small body\nof Levites (see below under _Authorship_), contemporaries, sharing the\nsame training and outlook; but it is much more reasonable to infer the\nactivity of a single writer\u2015\u2015the _Chronicler_. It is his date which we\nproceed to consider. The evidence may be grouped under three heads, of\nwhich the last two (B, C) are of chief importance.\n\n(A) (1) In 1 Chronicles xxix. 7 a sum of money is reckoned in _darics_,\na Persian coinage introduced by Darius\u00a0I (521\u2012486 B.C.).\n\n(2) In 1 Chronicles iii. 19b\u201224 (see note _ad loc._) according to the\nHebrew the line of David\u2019s family is traced to the sixth generation\nafter Zerubbabel (_circa_ 520 B.C.). Hence, reckoning a generation as\nabout 20 to 30 years, this passage would indicate a date not earlier\nthan 400 B.C. or 340 B.C. The Greek, Syriac, and Latin Versions,\nhowever, differ from the Hebrew by extending the line to the _eleventh_\ngeneration after Zerubbabel. That would imply a date possibly as\nlate as 200 B.C. and not earlier than about 300 B.C., but it is very\ndoubtful whether we can here rely upon the text of these Versions, and\nobviously it was easy for a translator or scribe to carry the list on\nto his own date. This piece of evidence, therefore, for the later date\ncannot be pressed, although it is worthy of notice.\n\nSince, as we have said (\u00a7\u00a02), Ezra\u2012Nehemiah formed originally one book\nwith Chronicles, evidence for the date of Chronicles is also furnished\nby any indications of date which occur in Ezra\u2012Nehemiah.\n\n(3) In Nehemiah xii. 22 we find the significant phrase \u201cto the reign\nof Darius, the _Persian_.\u201d Now as long as the Persian empire stood\nsuch a description would have no point when written by a Jewish writer.\nFor two hundred years down to 332 B.C., when Syria and Phoenicia fell\ninto the hands of Alexander the Great, the rulers of Judea were all\n\u201cPersians.\u201d But from 332 B.C. onward Greek monarchs were the rulers of\nPalestine, and nothing is more natural than that a Jewish chronicler\nwriting under their rule should refer to a king of the older r\u00e9gime as\n\u201cthe Persian.\u201d\n\n(4) Further, in Nehemiah xii. 26, 47 the phrase \u201cin the days of\nNehemiah\u201d occurs, implying that for the writer Nehemiah belonged to the\npast, but, as one cannot say how near or how distant a past, the point\ncarries little weight.\n\n(5) Again, in Nehemiah xii. 10, 11 and 22, 23, a list of high-priests\nis given, concluding with the name of Jaddua, whom the Chronicler\nevidently (and correctly, compare Josephus, _Antiquities of the Jews_\nxi. 7, 8) knew to have been the high-priest about 332 B.C., at the\nend of the reign of Darius (Darius III, Codomannus), when the Persian\nEmpire collapsed before the attack of Alexander the Great.\n\nThese details, indicative of the date of composition, are as numerous\nas we have any right to expect in a work of the nature of Chronicles,\nwhich deals with past history. Their evidential value can of course\nbe criticised by supposing that the passages in question are late\ninterpolations and have therefore no bearing on the date of the main\nbody of the work. But no solid grounds are adduced for this objection,\nand the burden of proof lies upon the objector. The supposition is\nextremely improbable, and may be dismissed in view of the fact that\n(B) the general character, and (C) the linguistic peculiarities of\nChronicles alike demand a date considerably later than the period of\nEzra\u2012Nehemiah.\n\n(B) The character of Chronicles has already been referred to, but in\na different connection (\u00a7\u00a02, pp. xvi f.). Here the point to notice is\nthat _throughout the entire work_ the whole system of law and ritual\nfound in the Pentateuch is presupposed as existing in its final form.\nThis system, which may conveniently be described as Priestly (P) in\ndistinction from the earlier system to which the name Deuteronomic\n(D) is applied, and the still earlier standpoint represented by the\nJahvistic and Elohistic writers (J and E), may have been of slow\ngrowth, and no doubt embodies features of law and ritual which are\nof relatively high antiquity. But there is overwhelming evidence\nto prove that, as an organised and completed _system_, it cannot be\ndated earlier than the period of Nehemiah (_circa_ 425 B.C.). Now in\nChronicles not only is this final code in force; it has evidently been\nso long and so firmly established that the Chronicler did not know, or\nat least did not believe, that any other earlier system had once ruled\nthe practice of Israel. He belonged to a period when the development\nof the Pentateuch was no more remembered, and when its origin\u2015\u2015in all\ncompleteness\u2015\u2015had come to be ascribed with absolute confidence to the\nremote past, in accordance with that religious instinct which we have\ndescribed above on p. xiv. Manifestly, a considerable lapse of time\nafter Nehemiah\u2019s period must be allowed for that conviction to have\nbecome established.\n\nAnother consideration is found in the attitude of the Chronicler\ntowards the kingdom of Israel. For the apostate Northern Kingdom\nthe Chronicler has only contempt and hatred and displays no interest\nwhatever in its fortunes, except that he takes pains occasionally to\nindicate the corruption of the North, thus emphasising by contrast the\nvirtue of the Judeans. His absorption in the affairs of Jerusalem and\nhis bitter antagonism to the North in all likelihood reflect the anger\nfelt by the post-exilic Jews of Jerusalem against the Samaritans after\nthe famous schism between the two communities. Indeed it is possible,\n\u00a7\u00a06 (1), that his work was directly inspired by the necessity of\ncombating the religious pretensions of the Samaritans with their Temple\non Mt Gerizim, rivalling Jerusalem. The Samaritan schism is generally\nsupposed to date from 432 B.C., but there are grounds for thinking that\nit was not so early, and _possibly_ the Temple on Mt Gerizim may have\nbeen built, not in 432, but in 332 B.C. If the later date be correct,\nwe have strong evidence for dating Chronicles not earlier than the last\nhalf of the fourth century B.C.\n\n(C) The late date of Chronicles is finally put beyond all doubt by\nthe linguistic peculiarities of the book. Excluding, of course, the\npassages drawn from earlier Scriptures, the Hebrew of Chronicles\nis of such a character that it is impossible to assign anything\nbut a late post-exilic date for its composition. In every aspect of\nlanguage\u2015\u2015grammar and syntax and vocabulary\u2015\u2015the diction exhibits the\nunmistakable characteristics of late Hebrew. It lies beyond the scope\nof the present volume to give details of the Hebrew, and reference\nmay be made to the edition of Chronicles by Curtis and Madsen\n(_International Critical Commentary_), pp. 27 ff., where a list of 136\nsuch peculiarities is given.\n\nThe _style_ of Chronicles is disappointing. The Chronicler had some\npraiseworthy qualities as a narrator: he displays force and imagination\nin the treatment of the material, he knew how to add a graphic touch,\nand he was able to revise a story thoroughly while preserving its\ninternal coherence (e.g. 1 Chronicles xxi.). But he had not the gift\nof choice language. In so late a work we could not hope to find the\nstrength and purity which characterised Hebrew prose of the \u201cgolden\nage.\u201d It must, however, be confessed that, judged even by the standard\nof its own age, the Hebrew of Chronicles is clumsy and displeasing in\nmany ways.\n\n * * * * *\n\nFrom this cumulative evidence we infer that the Chronicler was\ncertainly a post-exilic writer later than the period of Ezra\u2012Nehemiah\nand in all probability not earlier than about 300\u2012250 B.C. This is a\nvaluable and definite conclusion, but it is important to observe that\nit does not fully answer the problem of the date of the _present form_\nof Chronicles. It remains to ask whether the text as it has reached\nus (the Masoretic Hebrew) is precisely the text which left the\nChronicler\u2019s hands, and, if not, what changes have been introduced.\nIt is safe to say that the Hebrew text has been almost unchanged since\nabout 150 A.D., but between that date and the time of the Chronicler\nis a long and sometimes stormy period. The subject, though in many\nways important, is too intricate to be discussed here at length: a few\nremarks must suffice. (1)\u00a0Like all other books of the Old Testament,\nChronicles has suffered from the usual accidents of scribal errors in\nthe course of transmission; but the changes due to this cause, being\nunintentional, are as a rule unimportant and can often be detected and\ncorrected (see \u00a7\u00a010, _Text_). (2)\u00a0More serious are alterations made\nby revisers or scribes who were anxious to bring the narrative of\nChronicles into conformity with that of Samuel and Kings. In the last\ntwo chapters of 2 Chronicles the Hebrew text can be compared with an\n_old_ Greek Version (1 Esdras\u2015\u2015see \u00a7\u00a010, _Greek Versions_), and the\ncomparison indicates that changes of text (see notes on 2 Chronicles\nxxxv. 8, 15) and a harmonisation of Chronicles with Kings (see note\non 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 5; compare also verse 15) have occurred in that\nbrief section.\n\nExcept in these two chapters the old Greek Version has unfortunately\nperished, and for all the rest of Chronicles comparison can only be\nmade with a much later Greek Version, which is a translation of a\nHebrew text almost identical with the present, Masoretic, form. Even so,\ndifferences are found, notably a substantial passage deleted from the\nHebrew in 2 Chronicles xxxv. 19 (where see note). It is a legitimate\nconjecture that, if the _old_ Greek Version were extant throughout\nChronicles, considerable variations between the earlier and the present\ntext might be disclosed. (3)\u00a0Finally, internal evidence suggests that\na few passages are of a secondary character; i.e. interpolations by\na writer later than the Chronicler: such perhaps are 1 Chronicles vi.\n50\u201253; viii. 29\u201238; xxiv. 20\u201231; 2 Chronicles xv. 16\u201219 (see note verse\n17); xx. 33 (see note xvii. 6); xxxi. 17\u201219.\n\nInterpolations on a large scale are not likely to have been made. Yet\nit must be borne in mind that Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah were once a\ncontinuous work, and study of Ezra\u2012Nehemiah shows that those writings\nhave undergone a complex literary process, involving serious omissions\nand transpositions. This heightens the possibility that Chronicles also,\nbefore or after its separation from Ezra\u2012Nehemiah, was treated with\nfreedom. Thus \u201cthe recurrence of 1 Chronicles ix., Nehemiah xi. [both\ngiving a list of inhabitants of Jerusalem] in a single work hardly\nlooks like an original feature; like the more remarkable repetition of\nEzra ii., Nehemiah vii., the feature seems to point to the combination\nof sources which were primarily distinct\u201d (Cook, _1 Esdras_, in\nCharles\u2019 _Apocrypha_, p. 19, but see note on ix. 17). On the other\nhand the homogeneity of style and purpose in Chronicles tells strongly\nagainst the probability of large interpolations, and it is reasonable\nto believe that in the present text we have _substantially_ the work\nproduced by the Chronicler.\n\n(II) _Authorship._ Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah contain no hint whatsoever\nof the name of their author, and external evidence fails us equally.\nFrom the contents and tone of the work we can infer with comparative\ncertainty that he belonged to the Levitical order, and in all\nprobability was a member of one of the Levitical guilds of musicians\nand singers (see, e.g. 2 Chronicles xxxiv. 12, note). His character\nand conceptions can also be discerned from the nature of his work. That\nhe was a man of strong intellect and vivid imagination is shown by his\nqualities as a narrator (see p. xxi) and by the consistency and power\nwith which the whole work has been designed and carried through (see\nbelow, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a05, 6, 8). Beyond this it is futile to conjecture.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a04. CONTENTS\n\nThe books of Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah give a history of Israel and its\nancestors from Adam down to the conclusion of Nehemiah\u2019s activity on\nbehalf of the post-exilic community in Jerusalem, _circa_ 432 B.C. Of\nthis history the two books of Chronicles cover the period from Adam to\nthe fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.\u00b9 Before giving a detailed analysis,\nit may be of advantage to call attention to certain outstanding\nfeatures. Remark that (1)\u00a0the traditions of the period from Adam to\nSaul\u2019s death have been compressed into a series of genealogical lists\nwhich occupy chapters i.\u2012ix.; (2)\u00a0the rest of the two books gives an\naccount of the history of _Judah_ from the death of Saul down to the\ndestruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 586, the fortunes of\nNorth Israel being ignored, except for some scornful allusions to its\ndegeneracy in comparison with Judah and Jerusalem; (3) the keenest\ninterest is displayed by the writer in all matters connected with the\nLevites, the Temple, and its worship, so that an extraordinary amount\nof space is allotted to those subjects\u2015\u2015note especially 1 Chronicles\nvi., xxii.\u2012xxix.; 2 Chronicles iii.\u2012vii., xxix.\u2012xxxi., xxxiv. 8\u2012xxxv.\n19.\n\n \u00b9 Actually Chronicles concludes with the first three verses of\n Ezra i., which relate the famous edict of Cyrus, permitting\n the Jews to return to Jerusalem: see \u00a7\u00a02 (1).\n\nThe following Table gives a general survey of the contents of 1 and 2\nChronicles\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 The sign \u201c=\u201d in the Table means that the passage in\n Chronicles is a transcription, with little or no change, of\n the passage given in brackets; the sign \u201ccompare\u201d is used\n where the account in Chronicles differs considerably from or\n has only a faint connection with that of the passage in\n brackets.\n\n (A) 1 Chronicles i.\u2012ix.\u2003INTRODUCTORY GENEALOGIES.\n\n i. 1\u20124 (compare Genesis v. 3\u201232). Genealogy from Adam to the\n sons of Noah.\n\n 5\u201223 (= Genesis x. 2\u201229). The descendants of Japheth, Ham,\n and Shem.\n\n 24\u201228 Genealogy from Shem to Ishmael.\n\n 29\u201231 (= Genesis xxv. 12\u201216). Ishmaelite descendants of\n Abraham.\n\n 32, 33 (= Genesis xxv. 1\u20124). Arabian descendants of Abraham.\n\n 34\u201237 (compare Genesis xxxvi. 10\u201214). Edomite descendants\n of Abraham.\n\n 38\u201242 (compare Genesis xxxvi. 20\u201228). Genealogy of the\n Horite inhabitants of Seir.\n\n 43\u201251a (compare Genesis xxxvi. 31\u201239). The early kings of\n Edom.\n\n 51b\u201254 (compare Genesis xxxvi. 40\u201243). The \u201cdukes\u201d of Edom.\n\n ii. 1, 2 (compare Genesis xxxv. 22b\u201226). The sons of Israel.\n\n 3\u2012iv. 23 Genealogies of the tribe of Judah:\n\n ii. 3\u201217 Descent of the sons of Jesse.\n\n 18\u201255 Caleb. Jerahmeel. Caleb.\n\n iii. 1\u20129 (= 2 Samuel iii. 2\u20125; v. 14\u201216). David\u2019s sons.\n\n 10\u201224 The Davidic Line before and after the\n Captivity.\n\n iv. 1\u201223 Additional genealogies of Judah.\n\n iv. 24\u2012v. 26 Genealogies of Simeon, Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh.\n\n vi. 1\u201281 The tribe of Levi:\n\n 1\u20123 Genealogy from Levi to Eleazar.\n\n 4\u201215 The line of the high-priests to the Captivity.\n\n 16\u201230 The three clans of the Levites.\n\n 31\u201247 The singers.\n\n 48\u201253 Distinction between the sons of Aaron and the\n rest of the Levites.\n\n 54\u201281 The cities of the Levites.\n\n vii. 1\u201240 Genealogies of Issachar, Zebulun (see note on vii. 6),\n Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim, and Asher.\n\n viii. 1\u201240 Genealogies of Benjamin:\n\n 1\u201228 Various Benjamite families.\n\n 29\u201240 (compare ix. 35\u201244). The genealogy of the house of\n Saul.\n\n ix. 1\u201217 The heads of the families of Judah, Benjamin, and\n Levi, which dwelt in Jerusalem.\n\n 18\u201234 The duties of porters and Levites.\n\n 35\u201244 (= viii. 29\u201238). The genealogy of the house of Saul.\n\n (B) x.\u2012xxix. DAVID.\n\n x. 1\u201214 (= 1 Samuel xxxi. 1\u201213). The death of Saul at the\n battle of Gilboa.\n\n xi. 1\u20129 (= 2 Samuel v. 1\u201210). Coronation of David and capture\n of Jebus.\n\n 10\u201247 (compare 2 Samuel xxiii. 8\u201239). David\u2019s mighty men.\n\n xii. 1\u201240 David\u2019s adherents who brought him to the kingdom.\n\n xiii. 1\u201214 (=2 Samuel vi. 1\u201211). The removal of the Ark from\n Kiriath-jearim. Death of Uzza.\n\n xiv. 1\u20127 (compare 2 Samuel v. 11\u201216). David\u2019s sons born in\n Jerusalem.\n\n 8\u201217 (= 2 Samuel v. 17\u201225). Two Philistine attacks\n repulsed.\n\n xv. 1\u201224. Preparations for bringing home the Ark.\n\n 25\u2012xvi. 6 (compare 2 Samuel vi. 12\u201220). The Ark brought\n into the city of David.\n\n xvi. 7\u201236 (= Psalms cv. 1\u201215; xcvi. 1\u201213; cvi. 1, 47, 48).\n David\u2019s psalm of praise.\n\n 37\u201243 Arrangements for daily worship.\n\n xvii. 1\u201227 (= 2 Samuel vii. 1\u201229). Permission to build a\n Temple refused to David.\n\n xviii. 1\u201217 (= 2 Samuel viii. 1\u201218). David\u2019s foreign wars. His\n officials.\n\n xix. 1\u2012xx. 8 (= 2 Samuel x. 1\u201219; xi. 1; xii. 26\u201231; xxi.\n 18\u201222). Wars with Ammon, Syria, and the\n Philistines.\n\n xxi. 1\u201230 (= 2 Samuel xxiv. 1\u201225). The census and the plague.\n\n xxii. 1\u2012xxix. 20. David\u2019s preparations for the building of\n the Temple and for the establishment of its\n services:\n\n xxii. The choice of the Temple site. The charge to\n Solomon.\n\n xxiii. The organisation of the Levites.\n\n xxiv. The divisions (\u201ccourses\u201d) of the Priests.\n\n xxv. The divisions of the singers.\n\n xxvi. The divisions of the doorkeepers.\n\n xxvii. Various officers of David.\n\n xxviii. 1\u2012xxix. 20 David\u2019s charge to Solomon and to all\n Israel.\n\n xxix. 21\u201230 The Epilogue: The Great Rejoicing; the Anointing\n of Solomon; Summary of David\u2019s reign.\n\n (C) 2 Chronicles i.\u2012ix. SOLOMON.\n\n i. 1\u20126 (compare 1 Kings iii. 4). Solomon\u2019s sacrifice at Gibeon.\n\n 7\u201213 (= 1 Kings iii. 5\u201215). The Vision and the prayer for\n wisdom.\n\n 14\u201217 (= 1 Kings x. 26\u201229). Chariots and horses.\n\n ii. 1,\u00a02,\u00a017,\u00a018 (compare 1 Kings v. 15, 16). Bearers of\n burdens and hewers of wood and stone.\n\n 3\u201216 (compare 1 Kings v. 2\u201211). Negotiations with Huram\n (Hiram) king of Tyre.\n\n iii. 1\u2012v.\u00a01 (compare 1 Kings vi. 1\u2012vii. 50) The building and\n furnishing of the Temple.\n\n v. 2\u201214 (= 1 Kings viii. 1\u201211). The bringing in of the Ark and\n the descent of the cloud.\n\n vi. 1\u201211 (= 1 Kings viii. 12\u201221). Solomon\u2019s blessing.\n\n 12\u201242 (= 1 Kings viii. 22\u201250). Solomon\u2019s prayer.\n\n vii. 1\u20123 The descent of the fire upon the sacrifices.\n\n 4\u201210 (= 1 Kings viii. 62\u201266). The final rejoicings.\n\n 11\u201222 (= 1 Kings ix. 1\u20129). The second Vision and the\n acceptance of Solomon\u2019s prayer.\n\n viii. 1\u201213, 17, 18 (compare 1 Kings ix. 10\u201228). Various Acts\n of Solomon.\n\n 14\u201216 Organisation of the Priests and Levites in the\n Temple.\n\n ix. 1\u201228 (= 1 Kings x. 1\u201227). The Visit of the Queen of Sheba.\n Solomon\u2019s greatness.\n\n 29\u201231 (= 1 Kings xi. 41\u201243). The Epilogue.\n\n (D) 2 Chronicles x.\u2012xxxvi. THE ACTS OF THE KINGS OF JUDAH.\n\n x. 1\u2012xi.\u00a04 (= 1 Kings xii. 1\u201224). The Revolt of the Ten Tribes.\n\n xi. 5\u2012xii.\u00a016 (compare 1 Kings xiv. 21\u201231). The Acts of\n Rehoboam.\n\n xiii. 1\u201222 (compare 1 Kings xv. 1\u20128). The Acts of Abijah\n (Abijam).\n\n xiv. 1\u2012xvi.\u00a014 (compare 1 Kings xv. 9\u201224). The Acts of Asa.\n\n xvii. 1\u201219 Jehoshaphat\u2019s religious measures. His captains.\n\n xviii. 1\u201234 (= 1 Kings xxii. 1\u201237). Jehoshaphat with Ahab at\n Ramoth-Gilead.\n\n xix. 1\u2012xx.\u00a030 Jehoshaphat\u2019s judges. His victory in the\n wilderness of Tekoa.\n\n xx. 31\u201237 (= 1 Kings xxii. 41\u201249). The rest of the Acts of\n Jehoshaphat.\n\n xxi. 1\u201220 (= 1 Kings xxii. 50; compare 2 Kings viii. 17\u201224).\n Jehoram.\n\n xxii. 1\u20129 (= 2 Kings viii. 25\u201229; compare ix. 27, 28). Ahaziah.\n\n 10\u2012xxiii.\u00a021 (= 2 Kings xi. 1\u201220). The rise and fall of\n Athaliah.\n\n xxiv. 1\u201214 (= 2 Kings xii. 1\u201216). Restoration of the Temple\n under Joash.\n\n 15\u201222 Apostasy of the princes. Assassination of the\n prophet Zechariah.\n\n 23\u201227 (compare 2 Kings xii. 17\u201221). The Syrian War and\n the end of Joash.\n\n xxv. 1\u201213 (compare 2 Kings xiv. 1\u20127). Amaziah. The Edomite War.\n The Ephraimite ravages.\n\n 14\u201216 Apostasy of Amaziah.\n\n 17\u201228 (= 2 Kings xiv. 8\u201220). Capture of Jerusalem. Death\n of Amaziah.\n\n xxvi. 1\u201223 (compare 2 Kings xv. 1\u20127). Uzziah (Azariah).\n\n xxvii. 1\u20129 (compare 2 Kings xv. 32\u201238). Jotham.\n\n xxviii. 1\u201227 (compare 2 Kings xvi. 1\u201220). Ahaz.\n\n xxix. 1\u2012xxxi. 21 Hezekiah. Cleansing of the Temple. The Great\n Passover. Care for the priesthood.\n\n xxxii. 1\u201223 (compare 2 Kings xviii., xix.). The deliverance\n from Sennacherib.\n\n 24\u201233 (compare 2 Kings xx. 1\u201221). Hezekiah\u2019s sickness.\n His death.\n\n xxxiii. 1\u201220 (compare 2 Kings xxi. 1\u201218). Manasseh. His\n captivity and repentance.\n\n 21\u201225 (= 2 Kings xxi. 19\u201226). Amon.\n\n xxxiv. 1\u20127 (compare 2 Kings xxii. 1, 2; xxiii. 4\u201220). Josiah.\n Removal of the emblems of idolatry.\n\n 8\u201228 (= 2 Kings xxii. 3\u201220). Repair of the Temple.\n Discovery of the Book of the Law.\n\n 29\u201233 (= 2 Kings xxiii. 1\u20123). Renewal of the Covenant.\n\n xxxv. 1\u201219 (compare 2 Kings xxiii. 21\u201223). Josiah\u2019s Great\n Passover.\n\n 20\u201227 (compare 2 Kings xxiii. 28\u201230a). The death of\n Josiah.\n\n xxxvi. 1\u20124 (compare 2 Kings xxiii. 30b\u201234). Jehoahaz.\n\n 5\u20128 (compare 2 Kings xxiii. 36\u2012xxiv. 6). Jehoiakim.\n\n 9,\u00a010 (compare 2 Kings xxiv. 8\u201217). Jehoiachin.\n\n 11\u201221 (compare 2 Kings xxiv. 18\u2012xxv. 21). Zedekiah. The\n Captivity of Judah.\n\n 22,\u00a023 (= Ezra i. 1\u20123a). The decree of Cyrus.\n\nIt will be seen at a glance that large portions of earlier canonical\nScripture have been reproduced in Chronicles exactly or very closely:\nviz.\n\nGenesis x. 2\u201229; xxv. 1\u20124, 10\u201216; xxxvi., _passim_.\n\n1 Samuel xxxi.\n\n2 Samuel v.\u2012viii.; x.; xxiii. 8\u2012xxiv. 25.\n\n1 Kings iii. 4\u201214; v.\u2012vii. (in part); viii.\u2012x.; xi. 41\u2012xii. 24; xiv.\n21\u2012xv. 24 (in part); xxii. (in part).\n\n2 Kings viii. 17\u201229; xi., xii.; xiv. 1\u201222; xv., xvi. (in part);\nxxi.\u2012xxiv. (in part).\n\nEzra i. 1\u20123.\n\nAs the foregoing list shows, Chronicles by no means includes all the\nnarrative of Samuel and Kings. In particular may be noted the omission\nof any account of the early life of David (1 Samuel _passim_), the\n_Court History_ of David (2 Samuel xi.\u2012xx.), the history of Elijah and\nElisha (1 Kings xvii.\u2012xxi.; 2 Kings i. 1\u2012viii. 15), and the affairs of\nthe Northern Kingdom with a few exceptions.\n\nOn the other hand, Chronicles contains a great deal which is either\nindependent of or not immediately dependent on earlier books of the Old\nTestament: note especially the opening nine chapters of genealogies,\nthe last seven chapters of 1 Chronicles, and many passages, long and\nshort, in 2 Chronicles x.\u2012xxxvi. The origin and significance of this\nnew material will be discussed in the section on the _Sources_, \u00a7\u00a05.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a05. THE SOURCES\n\nFrom what has been said in \u00a7\u00a01 regarding the nature of ancient\nhistorical writings it will be realised that a careful examination\nof the material used in the compilation of Chronicles is a necessary\npreliminary to the task of estimating the purpose and value of the\nwork in its final form. Only when the extent of the sources has been\ndetermined can we say whether contributions made by the writer who\ncombined those sources into the existing work are so great or so\nsmall that we ought to reckon him in the one case a narrator whose\npersonality must be seriously considered, or in the other a mere\ncopyist and compiler.\n\n(1) In considering the material of Chronicles, it is convenient to\nbegin with those passages which seem to be copied or adapted from\nearlier books of the Old Testament. That such passages are numerous,\nand constitute a very large amount of 1 and 2 Chronicles will be seen\nby a glance at the table of contents given in \u00a7\u00a04. Occasionally the\nChronicler reproduced the canonical text _verbatim_, but generally\nhe introduced alterations, which were sometimes both numerous and\nimportant. The discrepancies thus produced between Chronicles and other\nparts of canonical Scripture presented a grave difficulty to the older\ncommentators, and the theory was put forward that the Chronicler used,\nnot the canonical books, but the still older sources from which the\ncanonical books themselves were built up and to which they frequently\nrefer. It was hoped thus to minimise the divergences by supposing\nthat the Chronicler had copied somewhat different portions of these\nold sources, and had approached them from a different standpoint. Not\nonly was this hypothesis in the highest degree improbable, but the\nreconciliation it was supposed to effect is now recognised to be for\nthe most part untenable. The theory is finally discredited by the fact\nthat these sources of the canonical books _always_ appear in Chronicles\ncombined together in precisely the same manner in which they are found\ncombined in the canonical books; i.e. they appear always \u2018edited,\u2019\nand never in their original, independent, form. It may be definitely\nasserted therefore that for all the passages which are common to\nChronicles and other canonical works the Chronicler was indebted solely\nto the text of the canonical books as it appeared in his time.\n\nAs for the divergences, real and apparent, between Chronicles and\nother canonical Scriptures, it is now recognised that, whilst they are\nproperly a subject for historical investigation, they do not involve\na religious problem. The old \u201creligious\u201d difficulty is answered by a\ndeeper comprehension of the nature of Inspiration. The real inspiration\nof the Scriptures does not, as was once thought, rest upon points of\nhistorical accuracy: see the article _Inspiration_ by A.\u00a0E. Garvie\nin the _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, vol. xiv., especially pp. 647 _ad\nfin._, 648, with the references there given.\n\n(2) More important and difficult is the problem of the source of the\n_new_ material in Chronicles. Nearly one-half of the two books of\nChronicles is material otherwise unknown to us, and not to be regarded\nas mere ornamental amplification of the passages drawn from canonical\nsources. Rather it is precisely these new parts which give colour to\nthe whole work, and there can be no doubt that the Chronicler must have\ndwelt with special fondness on just these passages. The question is,\nCan we discern or infer sources from which these independent chapters\nand paragraphs have been derived, or is the Chronicler himself their\nonly source and origin?\n\nIn attempting to answer that question, our first task is to note and\ndiscuss a long list of works to which the Chronicler appeals, either\nas authorities for what he says or as sources where fuller information\nmight (presumably) be expected. They are as follows:\n\nA. _Those with specific prophetic titles._\n\n [For the reigns of David and Solomon.]\n\n (1)\u2003The history (literally _words_, or _acts_) of Samuel the seer\n (1 Chronicles xxix. 29).\n\n (2)\u2003The history of Nathan the prophet (1 Chronicles xxix. 29;\n 2 Chronicles ix. 29).\n\n (3)\u2003The history of Gad the seer (1 Chronicles xxix.\u200329).\n\n (4)\u2003The last acts of David (1 Chronicles xxiii. 27). [Perhaps the\n same as (5).]\n\n (5)\u2003The chronicles (literally _acts of the days_) of king David\n (1 Chronicles xxvii. 24).\n\n (6)\u2003The prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chronicles ix. 29).\n\n (7)\u2003The visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chronicles ix. 29).\n\n [For the kings of Judah (excepting Jehoram, Ahaziah, Athaliah,\n Amon, Jehoahaz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah).]\n\n (8)\u2003The histories of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer\n (2 Chronicles xii. 15).\n\n (9)\u2003The commentary (literally _Midrash_\u00b9) of the prophet Iddo\n (2 Chronicles xiii. 22).\n\n (10)\u2003The history of Jehu the son of Hanani which is inserted in\n the books of the kings of Israel (2 Chronicles xx. 34).\n\n (11)\u2003A writing of Isaiah the prophet (2 Chronicles xxvi.\u200322).\n\n (12)\u2003The vision of Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz in the books\n of the kings of Judah and Israel (2 Chronicles xxxii. 34).\n\n (13)\u2003? The history of Hozai (literally _the seers_) (2 Chronicles\n xxxiii. 19).\n\n (14)\u2003? A genealogical register compiled in the time of Jotham and\n Jeroboam\u00a0II (1 Chronicles v. 17).\n\n (15)\u2003A collection of \u201clamentations\u201d (2 Chronicles xxxv. 25).\n\nB. _Those with general titles._\n\n (1)\u2003A Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel (cited for the reigns\n of Asa, Amaziah, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; 2 Chronicles xvi. 11,\n xxv. 26, xxviii. 26, xxxii. 32). Compare (12) above.\n\n (2)\u2003A Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah (cited for Jotham,\n Josiah, and Jehoiakim; 2 Chronicles xxvii. 7, xxxv. 27,\n xxxvi. 8).\n\n (3)\u2003A Book of the Kings of Israel (cited for genealogies,\n 1 Chronicles xix. 1; for the reign of Jehoshaphat, 2\n Chronicles xx. 24; and for Manasseh, 2 Chronicles xxxiii. 18).\n\n (4)\u2003A _Midrash_\u00b9 of the Book of Kings (for the reign of Joash,\n 2 Chronicles xxiv. 27).\n\n \u00b9 The noun _Midrash_ is derived from a verb meaning to _search\n out, explore_. The word occurs only in 2 Chronicles xiii. 22,\n xxiv. 27 in the Old Testament but is very common as a\n description of many works of later Jewish literature. A\n Midrash may be defined as an imaginative adaptation of\n an idea suggested by Scripture, especially a homiletic\n exposition or an edifying religious story. In midrashic\n writings \u201cnumbers are multiplied, all the details assume\n huger and more exalted proportions, right is always richly\n rewarded and wickedness signally punished, miracles are\n common, and prophets and kings deliver majestic, spiritual\n addresses, embodying the best doctrines of later Judaism\u201d\n (Kent, _Student\u2019s O.T._ II. p. 20). Several of the\n narratives in Chronicles partake of this character. For\n later and more obvious examples, compare the stories of\n Tobit and Susanna in the Apocrypha.\n\nThis great array of authorities dwindles to small proportions on\ninspection. Of the fifteen given under A, numbers 13, 14 are uncertain\nbut of very small importance, whilst number 15 is also unknown:\nit is _not_ the canonical book of Lamentations (see the note on\n2 Chronicles xxxv. 25). The rest, numbers 1\u201212, almost certainly were\nnot independent works, but simply sections of some comprehensive work\n(see especially numbers 10 and 12), it being the custom among the\nJews to refer to the sections of a large work by means of distinctive\ntitles\u2015\u2015compare Romans xi. 2, \u201cKnow ye not what the Scripture saith\n_in Elijah_.\u201d Thus some of these titles, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, may refer\nsimply to passages in the canonical books of Samuel and Kings, numbers\n11 and 12 to Isaiah xxxvi.\u2012xxxix. = 2 Kings xviii. 13\u2012xx. 19. But\nthe others (and perhaps some also of those just mentioned) in all\nprobability denote sections of a large history of a more or less\nmidrashic character; and it is this work apparently which is meant\nby the titles given under B. To these we now turn. It is generally\nadmitted that all four titles mentioned in B denote one and the same\nwork, a comprehensive history of the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel.\nThis work was _not_ our canonical books of Kings, for it is quoted as\ncontaining material not found in those books. Still less was it any of\nthe sources referred to in Kings: there is not the faintest probability\nthat any of the new material in Chronicles was derived directly\nfrom those very old sources. The question therefore is whether in\nthis general work to which the Chronicler appeals he had a source\n_independent_ or _semi-independent_ of Kings. Opinion is divided. Some\nscholars think that it was essentially dependent on the canonical Kings,\nmerely \u201ca reconstructed history, embellished with marvellous tales of\ndivine interposition and prophetic activity.\u201d Others maintain that this\nmidrashic history had its roots not only in canonical Kings but also\nin traditions partly or wholly independent of Kings. The latter opinion\nis here preferred, but the reasons for adopting it will be best seen if\nwe first state and consider two sharply opposing views put forward by\nrecent writers.\n\nOn the one side is Torrey (_Ezra Studies_, 1910) who argues that the\nChronicler had no source at all other than the canonical books\u2015\u2015all\nelse was the product of his imaginative skill. He describes this\nsupposed midrashic history of Judah and Israel as \u201ca phantom source,\nof which the internal evidence is absolutely lacking, and the external\nevidence is limited to the Chronicler\u2019s transparent parading of\nauthorities.\u201d The strength of Torrey\u2019s contention lies in the fact\nthat almost all the additional matter in Chronicles is written in one\nand the same distinctive style. That style has certain unmistakable\npeculiarities. Thus Driver in the _Encyclopedia Britannica_ s.v.\n_Chronicles_, col. 772, writes, \u201cIt is not merely that the style of\nthe Chronicler presents characteristically late linguistic novelties\n... but it has also a number of special mannerisms.... So constant are\n[these marks] that there is hardly a single sentence, not excerpted\nfrom Samuel or Kings, in which they are not discernible.\u201d On the other\nside we have to consider the attitude adopted in the commentaries of\nBenzinger (1901) and Kittel (1902), following up a suggestion made by\nB\u00fcchler in 1899. These scholars not only believe that non-canonical\nsources supplied much of the new material of Chronicles, but they have\nattempted to analyse that material minutely into various contributory\nelements. According to their view the Chronicler was essentially\na compiler, following his sources closely and showing such little\nindependence as he exercised chiefly in those verses and passages where\nthe affairs and interests of the Levites are set forth. In the opinion\nof the present writer that is not a satisfactory account of the part\nplayed by the Chronicler. It does not make sufficient allowance for the\nsingular homogeneity of style and purpose throughout the book. Torrey\u2019s\nwork is of value as a warning against the danger and difficulty of the\nanalysis which Benzinger and Kittel have essayed. Frequently the points\nwhich are adduced as evidence for distinction of sources are too few\nor too subjective to provide adequate ground for the analysis\u2015\u2015see the\ndetailed examination of the Hebrew provided in the edition by Curtis.\nBut, whilst it should be admitted that this uniformity of style carries\ngreat weight and must receive careful consideration, it does not, we\nthink, follow that Torrey\u2019s sweeping conclusion is correct, and that\nbehind the non-canonical passages there is nothing save the imagination\nof the Chronicler. To begin with, if that were true, the Chronicler\nwould be unparalleled amongst ancient historians. The originality of\nancient chroniclers was shown in the manner in which they combined,\nmodified, and embellished the nucleus given by tradition, but they did\nnot invent _de novo_ to the extent required by this theory. Even if\nthat be an over-statement, we can at least assert that they did not\nshut themselves up to their own imagination, if any traditions relating\nto their subject were current. On the contrary, they made use of all\nsuch available material, good or bad. And it is quite incredible that\nhistorical interest in Jerusalem regarding the old days of the Kingdom\nwas confined to the compilation of Kings until suddenly the Chronicler\nproduced this startlingly different account. There is very strong\nprobability that the version given in Chronicles has a long chain of\nantecedents behind it. For consider, further, the general situation.\nThe vicissitudes of time and fortune had caused great changes in the\npopulation of Jerusalem, but none that made absolutely impossible the\ncontinuance of traditions not represented or only partially represented\nby the narratives crystallised in Kings. Thus \u201cwe may safely assume\nthat the overthrow of Edom (2 Chronicles xxv. 5\u201213) and the leprosy\nof Uzziah (2 Chronicles xxvi. 16\u201223) were once told more fully than\nin the brief verses of 2 Kings xiv. 7, xv. 5. We may surely allow\nlinks between the impression left upon tradition by these events and\nthe stories that have been preserved by Chronicles\u201d (S.\u00a0A. Cook, in\nthe _Journal of Theological Studies_, xii. 470). It is now generally\nrecognised that the depopulation of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. was not\nnearly so complete as was once thought, and considerable continuity\nof tradition may have been maintained. Moreover, the influx of South\nJudean families in the exilic and post-exilic times must have meant an\nextension of popular tales concerning Judean affairs. It is therefore\nsignificant that the South Judean \u201cstrain\u201d is a marked feature in the\nChronicler\u2019s history. Again, it is practically certain that Levitical\npredecessors of the Chronicler felt somewhat the same interest as he\ndisplays in the origins of their order and institutions. Are we to\nsuppose that they made no attempts to gratify their curiosity, or to\nfind historical grounds for their claims? Surely they would seize with\ninterest on any and all current traditions, and would be constantly\ncollating them with the well-known version in Kings, adding whatever\nthey could to the total, and no doubt tending to retell the whole\u2015\u2015at\nleast the popular and edifying portions of the narrative\u2015\u2015in terms\nmore agreeable to the ideas and practices of their own time. We cannot\nsuppose that the Chronicler was the first and only Levite who attempted\nto satisfy the obvious need (\u00a7\u00a06) for an orthodox ecclesiastical\nversion of Judean history. Features of the genealogies, and in\nparticular the Levitical _data_, suggest the existence of statistical\nrecords, if of nothing more. One further small but interesting point\ndeserves mention. In 1 Chronicles iv. 9, vii. 23, xii. 18 there are\nsayings which cannot possibly originate with the Chronicler, for they\nare written in an archaic style utterly foreign to his manner of speech.\nOf these xii. 18 is poetical in form, while the other two are sentences\nof a type made familiar to us by early passages in Genesis. These\nverses, then, are certainly not the invention of the Chronicler, and,\neven if they are only isolated fragments, their existence is at least\nsignificant. In fine, the natural supposition is that in post-exilic\nJerusalem there were various traditions which were drawn partly, but\n_not exclusively_, from the particular recension of history preserved\nin Kings, and which continued to develop in form and perhaps in\ncontent after the \u201cKings\u201d recension was relatively fixed. Whether these\ndevelopments of traditions, canonical _and_ otherwise, preserve any\ngenuine history or not (\u00a7\u00a07), their existence in popular and priestly\ncircles of the Chronicler\u2019s time is, we think, almost certain; and it\nis quite certain that, if they were in existence, the Chronicler would\nutilise them. On this view, then, the sources of the Chronicler were:\n\n(a) The canonical books.\n\n(b) Variant forms of a few narratives in Kings; traditions of South\nJudean origin, recording movements of population and hostilities\nwith southern tribes; popular midrashic tales; family statistics\nand genealogies, particularly of the Priests and Levites; records or\ntraditions relating to the Temple, the fortifications of Jerusalem,\nand the repair of certain Judean towns\u2015\u2015_some_ of this material being\nreally independent of the traditions in Kings.\n\nThe problem raised by the stylistic uniformity of the new passages\nin Chronicles must now be considered. Probably the material indicated\nin (b) above may at times have crystallised into definite midrashic\nwritings. (Thus, when the Chronicler speaks of the \u201cHistory of the\nKings of Judah and Israel,\u201d we may believe that he refers to some such\ndocument, one that was either extant in his own age or was generally\nknown to have existed.) Probably, however, it was also to a large\nextent in a fluid oral condition\u2015\u2015matter of common knowledge and of\ncommon talk in Levitical circles. Certainly it is legitimate to think\nthat with this material, written or oral or both, the Chronicler was\nintensely familiar; and that he could easily have related it _in his\nown words_. We may surmise that his procedure was somewhat as follows:\nHe made the well-known narrative of Samuel\u2012Kings the basis of his\nversion, altering its words as little as possible, yet, if necessary,\nexercising great freedom, so as to make it fully orthodox in accordance\nwith the ecclesiastical standards of his time. Into this groundwork\nhe wove with admirable skill new material of fact and narrative, drawn\nfrom the sources set forth in (b) above; and all this new material he\nselected, revised, and related in such a fashion as might best serve\nthe very definite religious, moral, and ecclesiastical ends (\u00a7\u00a06)\nwhich his history was designed to meet. It passed, in fact, freely and\neffectively through the medium of his mind; so that it appears, if not\nwholly in his own words, at least coloured by his distinctive turns of\nspeech. A second way in which we can explain the uniform style of the\nnew matter in Chronicles and escape the conclusion that it has all\nbeen derived from the imagination of the Chronicler is to suppose that\nfor some time past it had been transmitted through the talk or writing\nof Levites like-minded with the Chronicler and sharing the same\necclesiastical fashion of speech; that, in fact, much of Chronicles was\nbuilt up by chroniclers before the Chronicler. There may be some truth\nin this argument; for, as was said above, the Chronicler was surely not\nthe first Levite to feel the need for an \u201corthodox\u201d history. The two\nexplanations can be regarded as supplementary rather than alternative;\nbut the present writer considers that stress should be laid chiefly\nupon the first.\n\nThis investigation of the structure of Chronicles yields the following\ngeneral result. The position here taken is opposed to the theory that\nthe whole of the new material was the product of the Chronicler\u2019s\nimagination and literary skill. It leaves open the valuable possibility\nthat the new material may preserve historical facts and traditions\nindependent of those in Kings. On the other hand it admits that the\nChronicler has had an important share in shaping the material and that\n(a) the consequent uniformity of style renders any attempt to analyse\nthe new matter into its proximate sources precarious (observe, however,\nthat the _immediate_ history of the sources behind the new material is\nnot of such primary importance to us as is the fundamental conclusion\nthat there _were_ such sources): and (b) whilst each part of the\nnew matter is entitled to a thorough examination on its merits,\ngreat care must be exercised to determine exactly what part the\nChronicler has played. Thus it is probable that some features of\nthe narratives in Chronicles may _originate_ with the Chronicler:\nthat is only what we should expect from a man able to plan and carry\nthrough a work so clearly intentioned and on such a large scale as\nChronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah. He may have told his tale not only in his own\nwords, but in his own way. We must be on our guard therefore to make\nallowance for the strength of his convictions, for his conception of\nthe course of history and for the intentions with which he wrote. How\nfar these considerations affect the historical value of his work will\nbe dealt with below (\u00a7\u00a07).\n\nThis discussion of the sources may conclude by emphasising the\nremarkable skill of the composition. The passages taken direct from\nthe earlier Scriptures have been so admirably combined with the new\nmaterial that the component parts have been wrought into a real unity.\nIt is evident we are dealing with an author of strong personality. What\nthe aim and purpose of this writer were we may now proceed to consider.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a06. THE PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THE CHRONICLER\n\n(1) In the time of the Chronicler the position of the orthodox party\nin Jerusalem, whose interests, civil and ecclesiastical, were bound\nup with the worship at the Temple on Mt Zion, was one of considerable\ndifficulty. During the Greek period (from 330 B.C.) the mental horizon\nof the Jews in Jerusalem had expanded even more than under the Persian\nrule (538\u2012330 B.C.). They were now able to realise their isolation and\npolitical insignificance, whilst at the same time the communities of\nJews scattered in all the leading countries of the ancient world were\nrapidly growing in size, influence, and in cosmopolitan outlook. Even\nthe religious supremacy of Jerusalem was threatened. We now know that\nthere was an important Jewish Temple at Elephantine in Egypt, which\nthe Jewish community there was eager to maintain. But far more serious\nwas the Samaritan schism and the Temple to Jehovah erected by them on\nMt Gerizim. We can well imagine that a rival Temple on _Palestinian_\nsoil claiming, no doubt with some show of justice, that there were true\nLevitical families among its priests, that its ritual was correct and\nits observance of the Law every whit as sound as that in Jerusalem, was\na matter of vital importance to the ecclesiastical orders at Jerusalem.\nUndoubtedly the feud was bitter in the Chronicler\u2019s time; and there are\nstrong grounds for holding that Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah were written\nwith the immediate object of confuting the ecclesiastical pretensions\nof the Samaritans and of showing that in Jerusalem only ought men to\nworship. Certainly Chronicles is well adapted for that end. A virulent\npolemic would have been discounted as a party document. The Chronicler\ninstead has skilfully retold the story of the past, so as to leave\ntwo main impressions. In the first place, by ignoring the affairs of\nthe Northern Kingdom, save where he intimates that its people were\nreligiously degenerate from the start (see 2 Chronicles xiii. 5\u201212),\nthat they were grievously decimated by a great disaster (2 Chronicles\nxiii. 13\u201217), and that in general their attitude on the subject of\nmixed marriages was scandalously lax (see Ezra and Nehemiah), he has\nsubtly but forcibly created the impression that the Samaritans were\nlittle better than \u201ca heterogeneous mob of heathen.\u201d Secondly and\nchiefly, his history was intended to show that Jerusalem, with its\nTemple on Mt Zion, is the _one_ place which Jehovah has chosen, and\nwhere He has set His Name. There alone was His worship properly and\nlegitimately established, and there alone can it still be carried\non. Jerusalem too, like Samaria, had suffered for its sins, but the\ndisaster of the exile, the break in the succession, was repaired,\nhe argues, through the return from Babylonia of that company of\nIsraelites of pure descent whom Ezra led back: the genealogies which\nare so noticeable a feature of Chronicles\u2012Ezra\u2012Nehemiah are given as\nirrefutable proof that the Jerusalem community of the Chronicler\u2019s\nday\u2015\u2015Levites and laymen\u2015\u2015were the true and only descendants of the\nnation of old. It followed that by them alone could the worship of\nJehovah be lawfully conducted.\n\nIt seems very probable that the Chronicler\u2019s work was directed\nspecifically against the Samaritans. But in any case it is undoubtedly\ntrue that the essential purpose of the book was to vindicate the\nreligious supremacy of Jerusalem, and to exalt the honour and the\nprivileges of its priesthood and its Temple.\n\n(2) In seeking to achieve this aim, the Chronicler inevitably dwelt\nupon those aspects of life and thought in which he specially believed.\nThus we may distinguish various features of his work which subserve the\nmain purpose:\n\n(a) He was anxious, for instance, to uphold the _political_ supremacy\nof Jerusalem, no easy matter in his time. To Jews of the Greek period,\nfully aware of the pomp and power of heathen states, the achievements\nof even such national heroes as David or Solomon probably seemed pale\nand insignificant, as they are related in Samuel or Kings. In order to\ncreate a due sense of their importance, and to mitigate the depressing\neffects of Jerusalem\u2019s present impotence, the Chronicler retold the\nglories of the past in terms commensurate with the notions of the\npresent. To this end he idealised the great men of Israel. Thus the\nlife of David is related by him as a career of almost unbroken success\nand of consistent piety. Thus also the sacrifices offered by Solomon\nat the dedication of the Temple are said to have been on a scale that\nmight well have astonished Alexander the Great.\n\n(b) Chiefly, however, the Chronicler was concerned with the _religious_\npre-eminence of Jerusalem. He delights therefore in magnifying to the\nfull the glories of the Temple, its ritual and its officers. It is\nquite clear that his interest in this theme is far wider than any\nimmediate polemical aim, and the subject deserves careful attention.\nWhen he describes the Temple of Solomon in terms of surpassing\nsplendour, he is not merely seeking to cast down the pride of Samaritan\nrivals, he is also gratifying the longings of his own heart\u2015\u2015how poor\nin comparison the outward form of the Temple he himself served so\nfaithfully! Perhaps also he hoped thereby to excite his own love for\nits well-being among the less ardent of his brethren. More important\nwas the question of _ritual and the Law_. We have already said (p. xx)\nthat the Chronicler lived at a time when the Pentateuch had for a long\nwhile existed in its final form, when the ritual and Law of Israel were\nregulated in accordance with its fully elaborated precepts; the whole\ncomplex system being supposed to have been imparted to Israel by Moses.\nNow, when the Chronicler and others like him turned to the historical\nrecords of their people, the books of Samuel and Kings, they found\nmany things which must have sorely puzzled them. For those records\nconstantly relate events in ways which run counter to the provisions of\nthe completed Pentateuch, sometimes ignoring, sometimes contradicting\nand breaking, its laws and practices. It is utterly unlikely that he\nand his fellows were aware that those books reflect the customs of an\nearlier period; so that in altering their narrative (as he does) he was\nnot conscious of falsifying history. Even if he was, we must not judge\nhis conduct by the opinions of our own time, but remember that \u201che\nlived in an age when certain accepted theories were regarded as more\nauthentic than recorded facts\u201d (Kent, _Student\u2019s O.T._ vol. ii. 23).\nIt is fair, however, to believe that in the inconsistencies of the\nolder histories with the observances of his own day he saw only an\nastonishing ignorance or carelessness in matters of the Law on the\npart of the older writers\u2015\u2015a state of affairs which called loudly for\ncorrection. For the good name of David and Solomon, for the honour\nof the pious Kings of Judah, as well as for the edification of his\ncontemporaries (and, maybe, for the confusion of the Samaritans), such\nflagrant blemishes had to be removed. And in Chronicles he has produced\n_a thorough revision of the history of Judah in accordance with the\nprinciples and provisions of the completed Pentateuch_. Throughout\nthe entire work this aim is consistently pursued. It must be therefore\nconsidered a main feature of the Chronicler\u2019s purpose. The alterations\nof the text of Samuel\u2012Kings which he has made on this account will be\nso frequently pointed out in the notes that here one simple example\nwill suffice. In 2 Samuel viii. 18 it is said, \u201cAnd the sons of David\nwere _priests_.\u201d Since in the Chronicler\u2019s time it was unthinkable that\nany could be priests save members of Levitical families, this statement\nwas corrected to read, \u201cAnd the sons of David were _chief about the\nking_\u201d (1 Chronicles xviii. 17). Finally, in the officials of the\nTemple\u2015\u2015Priests and Levites\u2015\u2015the Chronicler manifests the deepest\ninterest. Throughout his narrative he is vigilant to exalt the honour\nand privileges of those classes. In particular, he brings the guilds of\nLevitical singers into prominence so frequently that it is generally\nsupposed he was himself a member of that order of Levites.\n\nThese remarks on the principal features of the book indicate in general\nthe purpose and method of the Chronicler. Yet in a sense they do so\nexternally, and behind all else, as the animating force, there lies\nthe Chronicler\u2019s religious faith, his zeal for God. _That_ truly is his\nultimate motive; but it will be convenient to reserve what may be said\nconcerning it until a later stage (\u00a7\u00a08).\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a07. THE HISTORICAL VALUE OF CHRONICLES\n\nUntil recent times the burning question in the exposition of Chronicles\nhas been the problem of reconciling its statements with those in\nSamuel\u2012Kings, finding explanations for the inconsistencies, and\ncombining the additional matter given in Chronicles so as to form one\nharmonious narrative. So baffling was the task that even the Talmudists,\nmasters in the arts of subtle exegesis, doubted the accuracy of\nChronicles, and were inclined to treat it, not as an authority for the\nhistory, but as a book for homiletic interpretation (see references\nin the _Jewish Encyclopedia_ iv. 60). As soon as the character and\npurpose of the book, the circumstances and opinions of the writer,\nare understood, the demand for harmonising the variant accounts at\nall costs is seen to be mistaken, and the exposition of Chronicles is\nthereby freed from a burden by which it has been sorely hampered. The\nquestion of the historical value of its narratives remains one of great\nimportance, but on literary and scientific, not on religious, grounds\n(compare p. xxx).\n\nIt will make for clearness if we approach the subject by considering\nfirst (A) the direct historical value of Chronicles, i.e. its worth\nas a history of Judah; and secondly (B) its indirect historical value\nas a work of the period to which we have assigned its composition,\n300\u2012250 B.C. Under (A) our discussion may conveniently be divided into\na consideration of: (I)\u00a0those parts which reproduce or are apparently\nbased on Samuel\u2012Kings; (II)\u00a0the material wholly or apparently\nindependent of canonical Scripture.\n\n\n A.\n\n DIRECT VALUE.\n\n(I) If the Chronicler\u2019s version of the history was to gain acceptance\nat all, it was necessary to make the older well-known histories the\nbasis of his work. And indeed he himself no doubt conceived his version\nnot as contradictory of the older narratives but only as a more careful\naccount of the history of Judah, paying adequate attention to the\nreligious affairs in which he was specially interested. Hence, wherever\nthe text of Samuel and Kings was suitable for his purpose he reproduced\nit exactly\u00b9: an example is 2 Chronicles xviii. 3\u201234 = 1 Kings xviii.\n4\u201235. The historical value of passages which are merely transcriptions\nmust be discussed not here but in their original setting: obviously\ntheir value is that which they possess there\u2015\u2015neither more nor less.\nWe proceed therefore to consider the _changes_ introduced by the\nChronicler in using canonical sources. They are of various kinds:\n\n \u00b9 It must not be assumed that where the text of Chronicles\n and Samuel\u2012Kings now coincides, it has done so always. That\n conclusion is only generally true. Sometimes, it seems, the\n _original_ text of Chronicles was altered to conform more\n closely with Kings, and _vice versa_ the present text of\n Kings is sometimes the result of assimilation to Chronicles\n Unfortunately the evidence of the extant Greek versions\n (\u00a7\u00a010) is quite insufficient to tell us how far the present\n text of Chronicles has been modified by this assimilating\n tendency, except in the last two chapters of 2 Chronicles\n where the evidence of the Greek is peculiarly full. It is\n clear, however, that some by no means unimportant changes\n have taken place in the course of transmission: see \u00a7\u00a010,\n and the remarks on p. xxii.\n\n(i) A great number of _minor_ alterations have been made, conforming\nthe older material to the Chronicler\u2019s point of view. A few instances\nmay be given: 2 Samuel v. 21, \u201cAnd [the Philistines] left their\nimages there, and David and his men _took them away_\u201d = 1 Chronicles\nxiv. 12, \u201cAnd [the Philistines] left their gods there, and David gave\ncommandment, and they were _burned with fire_.\u201d Again, 2 Samuel xxiv. 1,\n\u201cAnd the anger of _the Lord_ was kindled against Israel, and he moved\nDavid against them, saying, Go, number Israel\u201d = 1 Chronicles xxi. 1,\n\u201cAnd _Satan_ stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel.\u201d\nAgain, 1 Kings ix. 12, \u201cThe cities which Solomon had given him (Huram)\u201d\n= 2 Chronicles viii. 2, \u201cThe cities which Huram had given to Solomon.\u201d\nCompare further 2 Samuel viii. 18 = 1 Chronicles xviii. 17 (quoted\nabove, p. xli\u00a0f.); 2 Samuel vi. 12 = 1 Chronicles xiii. 13; 2 Samuel\nxxiv. 24 = 1 Chronicles xxi. 25.\n\n(ii) In some instances the alterations are so many or of so radical a\nnature that the whole tenour of the passage has been transformed\u2015\u2015e.g.\nthe conspiracy against Athaliah which resulted in the coronation of the\nyouthful king Joash (2 Kings xi.) is rewritten (2 Chronicles xxiii.)\nto agree with the usages of the Temple in the Chronicler\u2019s time.\nSimilarly in the passage which follows (2 Chronicles xxiv. 4\u201214), which\nis certainly based on 2 Kings xii. 4\u201216, only some 30 words of the\noriginal have been kept, so freely has it been revised. Again, the\naccount of the destruction of Jehoshaphat\u2019s fleet (1 Kings xxii. 48 f.)\nis remarkably altered in 2 Chronicles xx. 35\u201237. Compare further 1\nChronicles xv. 25\u201228 = 2 Samuel vi. 12\u201215; 2 Chronicles xxii. 7\u20129 =\n2 Kings ix. 27, 28; 2 Chronicles xxxii. 1\u201223 = 2 Kings xviii. 13\u2012xix.\n37 (a free abridgment).\n\n(iii) Another noteworthy feature in the Chronicler\u2019s treatment of\nthe canonical sources is his _omissions_. These call for mention here\nbecause they are not only significant of his feelings and principles,\nbut they also have an immense effect on the impression conveyed by his\nnarrative as compared with that of his source. Not a word, for instance,\nis said that would detract from the picture of David as the man after\nGod\u2019s heart and the ideal monarch of Israel. The perils of his youth,\nSaul\u2019s enmity and the long struggle against Ishbosheth are omitted\u00b9.\nHis murder of Uriah and the disastrous rebellion of Absalom are\nignored; but the result is a David very different from the great yet\nsometimes erring monarch depicted in Samuel (see the head-note to\n1 Chronicles xxviii.). Another significant omission is 2 Kings xviii.\n14\u201216, Hezekiah\u2019s payment of tribute to Babylonia, a tradition which\ndoubtless seemed to the Chronicler a sign of weakness and lack of faith\nincredible in a king so pious and successful. Above all, we notice\nthe omission of the affairs of the Northern Kingdom, except for a\nfew derogatory notices. The consequence is that if Chronicles stood\n_alone_, our conception of the relative importance of Judah as compared\nwith Israel would be very far removed from the actual facts. It is a\nsimple matter to see how imperative it is that the impression given by\nChronicles should here be corrected by the records in Kings, and the\nstudent will find it instructive to consider the point with some care.\n\n \u00b9 Such omissions are very skilfully managed by the Chronicler.\n Even so, they generally entail some abrupt transition or\n obscurity, as in the present instance for which see the\n note on 1 Chronicles xi. 1. Here the cause of the obscurity\n can be shown by direct comparison of the earlier history\n in Samuel. Mark how usefully Chronicles thus demonstrates\n the _legitimacy_ of the argument that similar difficulties\n elsewhere in the Old Testament are perhaps due to a similar\n cause, although the earlier source may not be extant to\n prove that the conjecture is correct.\n\nThe conclusions to be drawn from the above are clear. First, in\npassages of the type instanced in (ii) above, where the differences\nbetween Kings and Chronicles are considerable and not confined to\nchanges made on transparently religious grounds, the possibility that\nwe have to do with a variant form of the tradition in Kings should be\ncarefully considered. If there be any such distinct traditions, even\nthough they are few or in a late stage of development, they are of\nhigh value, for they _may_ be as worthy of consideration as the form\nin Kings. Moreover a slight variation in a tradition may occasionally\nsuffice to indicate the existence of a different standpoint towards an\nimportant topic or period in the history. But in the majority of _all_\ncases included under this heading (I) it appears that the changes in\nthe narratives were arbitrarily made in consequence of the standpoint,\nbeliefs, and purpose (\u00a7\u00a7\u00a01 and 6) of the Chronicler, and they can make\nno claim to rest on historical facts. For the detailed arguments upon\nwhich this general conclusion is based, the reader is referred to the\nnotes on the text.\n\n(II) The _additional_ matter of Chronicles includes a variety of\nsubjects. These may be roughly but conveniently summarised under the\nfollowing headings\u2015\u2015(1) _genealogical lists_ (1 Chronicles ii.\u2012ix.,\nxxiii.\u2012xxvii., etc.); (2) _topographical and other archaeological\nnotices_ (e.g. 1 Chronicles xi. 41\u201247; 2 Chronicles xvii. 7\u201210, xix.\n4\u201211, xxvi. 6, 49, xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14, and notably the organisation\nof the Levites, 1 Chronicles xxiii., xxiv., and details regarding the\nbuilding of Solomon\u2019s Temple, e.g. 2 Chronicles ii.\u2012iv., _passim_);\n(3) _letters and speeches_ (1 Chronicles xvi. 8\u201236, xxii. 6\u201219,\nxxviii. 2\u201210, xxix. 1\u201220; 2 Chronicles xv. 1\u20127, xvi. 7\u201210, xxi. 12\u201215);\n(4) _national events, especially religious affairs and wars_ (e.g.\n1 Chronicles iv. 34\u201243, v. 6, xxiii.\u00a0ff.; 2 Chronicles xvii. 7\u201210,\nxix. 4\u201211, xxix. 3\u2012xxx. 27), such topics being sometimes related in\nthe style of (5) _Midrashim_\u2015\u2015i.e. edifying tales describing marvellous\ndeliverances from foes and splendid religious ceremonies (2 Chronicles\nxiii. 3\u201220, xiv. 9\u201215, xxx. 13\u201227, and especially xx. 1\u201230\u00b9). If,\nas Torrey contends, the whole of this is simply the product of the\nChronicler\u2019s imagination working upon the canonical sources only and\nfreely interpreting events in accordance with his own convictions, then,\nwe must frankly admit, its historical value as a record of the past\nit purports to describe is _nil_. If, however, according to the view\ntaken in this volume (see \u00a7\u00a05), much of this material is drawn from\na body of tradition, oral and written, current in the Jerusalem of\nthe Chronicler\u2019s day, and not represented in canonical writings, the\nquestion of historical value is still open. Our task, then, is to\nconsider whether among the extra-canonical traditions some genuine\nhistorical facts may have been preserved. The problem is not easy, and,\nas yet, it does not admit of so exact and definite a reply as we should\nlike to give. Obviously the answer requires a thorough consideration\nof each _item_ of the new material, a task which would far exceed\nthe scope of this introduction. There are, however, some general\nobservations which throw light upon the problem. These we shall give\nhere, reserving the discussion of individual passages for the notes.\nTaking the subjects enumerated above in order, we have:\n\n \u00b9 The subjects thus classified are not, of course, mutually\n exclusive\u2015\u2015thus a letter or speech and statements of alleged\n historical events will frequently be a part of the contents\n of some midrashic passage.\n\n(1) The new _genealogical lists_, which are so prominent a feature of\nChronicles. Some of these lists are certainly not trustworthy records\nof pre-exilic times\u00b9. But others, e.g. parts of the Calebite and\nLevitical genealogies, probably embody facts concerning the kinships\nand distribution of various South Judean families in pre-exilic and\nexilic times, and furnish valuable evidence of a northward movement\n(see S.\u00a0A. Cook, _1 Esdras_, p. 12 in Charles\u2019s _Apocrypha_, or his\narticles on _Caleb_, _Judah_, _Levites_ in _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9).\nIt is certain that in post-exilic Jerusalem a considerable part of\nthe population were descendants of these south Judean clans. Surely\nit would be surprising if no valid traditions of their relationships,\ntheir movements and fortunes, had been preserved amongst them. There\nis therefore good reason for holding that some historical information\n(e.g. 1 Chronicles iv. 34\u201243) may be found in these lists, and it\nis possible that a close study of certain of the genealogies will\nyield most valuable light on some of the main questions of Old\nTestament history and literature. Unfortunately the study of the\nintricate problems involved is not yet sufficiently advanced to permit\nconclusions which meet with general acceptance.\n\n \u00b9 On the other hand they may have historical value as\n regards the families of Judah and Jerusalem in or about\n the Chronicler\u2019s own generation\u2015\u2015a point, however, which\n properly falls to be discussed under B below.\n\n(2) Much of the _topographical_ and _archaeological_ information\nscattered here and there in the books of Chronicles does not inspire\nconfidence, but part may rest on old tradition; compare the headnote\nto 1 Chronicles xii. 1\u201222. Many of the references in chapters i.\u2012ix.\n(e.g. vii. 24, viii. 12, etc.) to Judean townships, whether explicitly\nmentioned (e.g. 1 Chronicles vi. 54 ff.), or lightly disguised in\nthe genealogical tables (e.g. 1 Chronicles ii. 18 ff., 50 ff.), are\nvaluable not only for information regarding the relationship of Jewish\nfamilies and movements of southern peoples, Edomites and Arabians\n(see (1) above, and the note on 1 Chronicles ii. 42), but also as\nevidence of the extent (small indeed!) of the territory occupied by the\npost-exilic Jewish community (compare H\u00f6lscher, _Pal\u00e4stina_, pp. 18\u201223,\n26\u201231). It is further plausibly suggested that notices of certain\ntribes of the Northern Kingdom (e.g. Ephraim and Manasseh) may be\nregarded as indications of the extension of Judaism in Samaria and\nGalilee about the Chronicler\u2019s period (see note on 2 Chronicles xv.\n9). The Chronicler was singularly interested in building operations\n(see, e.g. 2 Chronicles xxvi. 9, xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14) and some\nof his references to the building of fortified townships in Judea\n(2 Chronicles xi. 5 ff., xiv. 6, xvi. 1\u20126, xvii. 12) and to the origin\nof buildings and gates in Jerusalem may be correct (see 2 Chronicles\nxxvi. 5\u201210, note).\n\n(3) As regards the _letters_ and _speeches_ which are ascribed by the\nChronicler to various kings and prophets\u2015\u2015e.g. David, Elijah, Azariah,\netc.\u2015\u2015these cannot be deemed authentic. For example, the great song\nof praise attributed to David in 1 Chronicles xvi. 7 ff. is wholly\ncomposed of quotations from Psalms of late date. Such speeches or\nletters are examples of a device constantly and legitimately employed\nby _ancient_ historians as a method of imparting vividness and spirit\nto their narrative. The letters and speeches represent simply what\nought in the historian\u2019s opinion to have been written or spoken. The\nGreek historian, Thucydides, carefully states the practice: \u201cI have,\u201d\nhe writes, \u201cput into the mouth of each speaker the sentiments proper\nto the occasion, expressed as I thought he would be likely to express\nthem....\u201d (Thucydides i. 22)\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 The practice is not peculiar to Chronicles, and these\n remarks are generally true of the correspondence between\n Solomon and Hiram and the long prayer of Solomon, found\n in 1 Kings v. 2\u20129, viii. 22\u201250, and transcribed (with some\n expansions) in 2 Chronicles ii. 3\u201216, vi. 12\u201242.\n\n(4) _National events_, such as _religious ceremonies_ (e.g. Hezekiah\u2019s\nPassover, 2 Chronicles xxix.\u2012xxxi.) and _wars_ (e.g. 2 Chronicles\nxx. 1\u201230) constitute as a rule the subject-matter of (5) the pious\n_midrashic passages_; so that (4) and (5) may conveniently be treated\ntogether. _Midrash_ is not serious history, and very probably was\nnot intended to be regarded as such even by its author. It is earnest\nmoral and religious teaching presented in a quasi-historical dress.\nIn all these passages the _form_ of the tale is unhistorical, and all\nmidrashic features, such as the incredibly and often impossibly large\nnumbers given in Chronicles, must without hesitation be set aside; but\nit does not follow that the tale has no historical foundation whatever,\nthat the events around which it was written were originally unreliable.\nIn an ancient writing mythical features do not afford a proper ground\nfor rejecting a tale as historically worthless\u2015\u2015a fact which requires\nto be emphasised. An interesting example is found in the extraordinary\nlegends which attached themselves to the life of Alexander the Great\nand rapidly spread throughout Europe and Asia (see _Encyclopedia\nBritannica_\u00b9\u00b9 vol. i. pp. 550 f.).\n\nPerhaps the most striking instance in Chronicles is the amazing and\nbloodless victory vouchsafed to Jehoshaphat over certain Bedouin tribes\nwho invaded Judah from the desert by the southern end of the Dead\nSea (2 Chronicles xx. 1\u201230, where see notes). As told in Chronicles,\nthe story is a _Midrash_, preaching the duty of trust in God and\nof obedience to His will at all hazards; but it is evident that the\nmoral and religious form of the story has been built on and around\na tradition of a desert raid on Judah. Now this nucleus of the tale\nmay easily rest on historical fact. Fierce but undisciplined invaders,\nadvancing from the desert through the difficult country of south Judah,\na land of cliffs ravines and caves, might be sorely harassed by the\nguerilla attacks of the shepherd population of that region, and finally\nbroken up by the outbreak of internal dissensions, before the main\nJudean army from Jerusalem had arrived to oppose their advance in force.\nSuch an event would quickly fade from the military recollections of\nJerusalem, but might be long perpetuated as a _local_ tradition among\nthe shepherd class of the district where the victory was won. Thus we\nshould have, on the one hand, a reason for its non-appearance in the\nearlier _strata_ of memories embodied in Kings. On the other hand,\nwhen the South Judean families had moved northward to Jerusalem in\nthe exilic and post-exilic days, the story would gain currency, and\none can easily see how suitable it was for development into just\nsuch a religious narrative as we find in Chronicles. The raid, then,\nis probably a genuine tradition, but, even so, a word of caution is\nrequired. It is necessary still to consider the question whether the\nstory is correctly associated with the time of Jehoshaphat. Perhaps,\nyes; but _possibly_ several such raids took place, and the memories of\nthem may have been confused and combined into one; or, again, the names\nof the original foes may have been changed into those of more recent\nopponents. Other important passages of this type are discussed in the\nnotes on 2 Chronicles xiii. 3\u201220, xiv. 9\u201215, xxxiii. 11\u201213.\n\nOne point calls for special mention. In the later chapters of 2\nChronicles the Chronicler\u2019s account of the history, particularly as\nregards the relations of the Judean kingdom with the Edomites and\nArabians to the south, is characterised by a freshness and independence\nwhich suggests that he was here relying on definite and valuable\ntraditions (see notes pp. 257\u00a0f., 262, 280\u00a0f., 286 f., 292).\n\nThese results do not provide the complete material for an estimate of\nthe historical value of Chronicles. To them must first be added the\nconclusions noted below, under B.\n\n\n B.\n\n INDIRECT VALUE.\n\nAlthough the Chronicler says not one word directly of his own times,\nindirectly his work gives us much useful information concerning that\nobscure period. In very many ways Chronicles is a mirror reflecting\nthe thoughts, hopes, and circumstances of the orthodox community in\nJerusalem, _circa_ 300\u2012250 B.C. Indirect and unconscious though the\nevidence may be, it is still precious, for our knowledge of the period\nis so slight that all fragments of information are most welcome.\n\nSome of the genealogical lists yield information regarding the\npost-exilic population of Judah and Jerusalem. Certain references\n(see p. xlviii) perhaps imply the extension of Judaism in Palestine.\nFrom the descriptions of the Temple and its organisation, facts\ncan be gleaned regarding the Temple of the Chronicler\u2019s own age.\nThus in 1 Chronicles xxiii ff. where the Chronicler ascribes to David\n(unhistorically, see notes pp. 51 f., 136, 145) the origination of the\nLevitical arrangements in the Temple, he gives an elaborate description\nof their organisation; and therein we can see a picture of the complex\nsystem and duties of the Priests and the Levites (with the subordinate\nclasses of doorkeepers and singers) as these were finally determined in\nthe late post-exilic Temple. Some interesting inferences can be drawn\nfrom Chronicles regarding the instruction of the people in matters of\nreligion. When in 2 Chronicles xvii. 7\u20129 arrangements for teaching the\nLaw throughout Judah are said to have been instituted by Jehoshaphat,\nwe may be sure that some such system was in vogue in the Chronicler\u2019s\nday, or, at the very least, that the Chronicler and his fellow-Levites\nwere anxious to see it fully carried out. Perhaps schools for\ninstructing the people had already been established in Jerusalem,\nand it was desired to extend them throughout the countryside as well.\nSignificant in the same connection is the remark ascribed to Azariah\nthe prophet (2 Chronicles xv. 3): \u201cNow for long seasons Israel hath\nbeen without the true God and _without a teaching priest_ and without\nlaw\u201d (compare 2 Chronicles xxxv. 3). Similarly from 2 Chronicles xix.\n4\u201211 we may infer the existence of, or the desire to establish, a\ncareful system of courts of justice under the control of the Levitical\norder. Again, Chronicles contributes to our knowledge of the evolution\nof public worship. The subject is so obscure, the details so unknown,\nthat we may be grateful for anything which helps us to discern even\nbroad stages in the development. Undoubtedly those flagrant abuses of\nworship which called forth the denunciations of Isaiah and Jeremiah had\npassed away. One gathers that public worship in the Temple had become\nan affair of truly religious significance. The prayer of Solomon is\nrepeated from Kings, but in addition the Chronicler ascribes similar\nutterances of praise, supplication, and thanksgiving to David and\nHezekiah, and the good kings (especially Hezekiah and Josiah) are\nrepresented as zealously active in ordering and arranging for great\nservices of worship which the people were to attend. All this, of\ncourse, is related of the past, but from it we may infer facts of\nthe Chroniclers present. We infer, then, a community accustomed to\ngather constantly at the Temple for the worship of their God. The\nmain elements of public worship can be traced. There was, of course,\nthe ancient ritual of animal sacrifice, hallowed for the Jews by its\nvast antiquity, and grown the more impressive in proportion as the\nliteralism of the past was forgotten and men felt more vividly that the\noffering was symbolic of things of the spirit\u2015\u2015of the mystery of life,\nof forgiveness, and of recognition that all things are the gift of God.\nUndoubtedly there was public prayer. It is hardly possible to read the\nprayers of the great kings in Chronicles and not feel that they echo a\nliturgy of prayer\u2015\u2015for the individual and for the nation. There was a\ngreat and impressive service of song and of music, compare 2 Chronicles\nv. 12, 13: _that_ is writ large indeed on the pages of Chronicles;\nand 1 Chronicles xvi. 8 ff. is enough to tell us that the Psalter\nwas the book of praise. We have a sufficient hint, too, that to the\nsongs at least, if not to the prayers also, the people were expected\nto respond\u2015\u2015\u201cAnd all the people said, Amen, and praised the Lord\u201d (2\nChronicles xvi. 36). Probably arrangements were in vogue for regular\nreading of the Law, although Chronicles alone would hardly suffice to\nestablish the point (2 Chronicles xxxiv. 31 is insufficient evidence).\nEven if it be thought that this picture represents rather the ideals of\nthe Levites than the actual attainments of the community, it is still\nimportant that such a standard of worship was conceived by the priests\nand set before the people. One recalls the words of the great prophet\nof exilic or post-exilic times who wrote: \u201cfor mine house shall be\ncalled a house of prayer for all peoples\u201d (Isaiah lvi. 7). His was a\nvision of the Temple as the centre of the whole world\u2019s worship. To\nthe Chronicler it had at least become a true \u201chouse of prayer\u201d for\nIsrael. Other details might be mentioned, but these will suffice to\nindicate the light which Chronicles throws upon the _conditions_ of\nthe post-exilic community.\n\nMuch more important, however, is the insight we gain into the methods\nand principles, the ideals and the ideas which prevailed in Temple\ncircles in Jerusalem during the third century B.C. Chronicles, like\nall distinctive books, is necessarily eloquent of its author\u2019s mind and\ncharacter. Now the Chronicler was a Levite of the Levites, and no doubt\ntypical of his class at this period. But we know that this period was\nof the highest importance in the formation of the Old Testament, and it\nwas precisely at the hands of the orthodox Levitical circles that many\nbooks of the Jewish Scriptures, especially the Laws, the Histories, and\nthe Psalms, underwent the revision which brought them approximately to\ntheir present form. It is therefore extremely valuable that we should\nbe able to study the psychological characteristics of a typical Levite\nof that age. From this point of view hardly any part of Chronicles is\nwithout significance. Thus the midrashic stories, whatever their value\notherwise, at least reveal a great deal regarding the mental and moral\noutlook of the writer and his contemporaries.\n\n\u201cChronicles,\u201d it has been said (Bennett, _Expositor\u2019s Bible_, p. 20),\n\u201cis an object-lesson in ancient historical composition.\u201d But it ought\nalso to teach us that history is something more than the record of\noccurrences. Facts are fundamental, but of profound importance also\nis the attitude in which we approach them.\n\nTo sum up the whole matter of this section. Compared with Samuel\u2012Kings,\nChronicles is of little or no value as a record of the history of\nthe Judean kingdom. Where it differs from those books, in almost\nall cases the earlier account is the more accurate and trustworthy.\nIn what Chronicles _adds_, there may sometimes be found traditional\ndevelopments of genuine historical facts. Even if they should prove\nto be few, it is possible that there may be among them some points of\nhigh importance for our understanding of the Old Testament records.\nFinally, as a product of the Greek period, Chronicles is very valuable\nin illustrating the methods, ideals, and temperament of the Levitical\nclasses of Jerusalem about that time.\n\nThese results are disappointing only if we insist on treating\nChronicles as a manual of early Judean history instead of as a\nremarkable and in some ways unique religious work.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a08. THE RELIGIOUS VALUE OF CHRONICLES\n\nChronicles has suffered by comparison with the fresher, more human,\nhistory in Samuel and Kings. It has seemed to modern taste somewhat dry\nand uninspiring. To the superficial reader any religious feeling in the\nbook is devoted to the concerns of a ritual that has long since passed\naway, and with which we might in any case have little sympathy. And, of\ncourse, the contrast is still more unfavourable if it be made with the\nbooks which contain the noblest utterances of Jewish faith. Job in his\nanguish crying \u201cthough He slay me yet will I trust Him\u201d; the Psalmist\nfearless of all ill since God is with him; Hosea who wrote of God \u201cI\ndesire mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than\nburnt offerings\u201d\u2015\u2015these stand on a higher spiritual level than the\nChronicler. None the less, there _is_ virtue, and even great virtue,\nin Chronicles, and failure to perceive it only argues lack of insight\non our part.\n\nIn the first place, if Temple ritual and observance of the precepts\nof the Law bulk too largely in the Chronicler\u2019s conception of the\nreligious life, he had much excuse for his attitude. In his day and\ngeneration, faithfulness to Jehovah and to that moral and spiritual\ninterpretation of life for which the worship of Jehovah stood,\ninevitably involved participation in the organised services which\ncentred in the Temple. Whatever its imperfections, the Temple at\nJerusalem in his time was performing a great religious work in keeping\nalive zeal for Jehovah and His Law in the face of much degenerate\nheathenism. Moreover it is an unfair and a false assumption to suppose\nthat his manifest devotion to the ritual necessarily or probably meant\nthat his religion was mere formalism or his creed poorly conceived.\nBehind the parade of the formalities of worship burns a living faith.\nThe freedom with which the Chronicler has retold the history to conform\nwith his religious views is indeed the measure of the force of his\nbeliefs. We have already noted (p. xlix) as regards one midrashic\npassage that it is essentially a sermon on the need for trust in God.\nThe Chronicler was passionately convinced that virtue is rewarded and\nvice is punished. He believed in a God supremely just yet merciful,\nOne who rules directly and personally in human life, destroying evil,\nguiding and fostering all that is true and good. \u201cThe might of nations\ncounted as nothing before Him. Obedience and faith in Jehovah were\nmore effective instruments in the hands of Israel\u2019s kings than powerful\narmies and strong alliances.\u201d It is easy to smile at the Chronicler\u2019s\nbelief that piety is necessarily rewarded by worldly prosperity, and\nsin by worldly misfortune. But, if the life and teaching of Jesus\nChrist have led us to a deeper interpretation of life, that does\nnot lessen the virtue of the Chronicler in maintaining his faith in\nGod\u2019s justice and vigilance, despite all the cruel evidences of the\nprosperity of the wicked. His doctrine of reward and punishment was\ncrude, but after all he was striving, as best he knew how, to maintain\nthe great central conviction of religion that \u201call things work together\nfor good to them that love God.\u201d Everywhere his work is dominated\nby the sense of right and wrong, and a clear-eyed perception of the\nabsolute distinction between them. He brings all men and all things to\na moral and religious test. The imperishable worth of Chronicles will\never be that it is the record of a man\u2019s endeavour to present, in terms\nof national experience, the eternal laws of the spiritual realm.\n\nFinally, since the Chronicler was retelling the past in terms of the\npresent, we know that these beliefs of his were not rules applied\nin theory to history and ignored in present practice. They were the\nconvictions by which his own soul lived. No one can afford to despise\na man who was prepared to walk by the light of such a faith amid the\ndifficulties and the perils which surrounded the enfeebled Jerusalem\nof that age. As Curtis says, \u201cit was under the tutelage of men like\nthe Chronicler that the Maccabees were nourished and the heroic age of\nJudaism began.\u201d We must not allow any distaste for legalism in religion\nto blind us to the virtues of the post-exilic Jews. The very rigidity\nof the ritual and the doctrine was essential to the preservation of\nthe nobler elements in the faith. In the memorable words of Wellhausen\n(_Prolegomena_, pp. 497 f.), \u201cAt a time when all nationalities, and\nat the same time all bonds of religion and national customs were\nbeginning to be broken up in the seeming cosmos and real chaos of\nthe Graeco-Roman Empire, the Jews stood out like a rock in the midst\nof the ocean. When the natural conditions of independent nationality\nall failed them, they nevertheless artificially maintained it with an\nenergy truly marvellous, and thereby preserved for themselves, and at\nthe same time for the whole world, an eternal good.\u201d Chronicles may\njustly claim to have played a part in that extraordinary triumph.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a09. NAME AND POSITION IN THE CANON\n\n_Name._ The Hebrew title is _Dibhr\u0113 Hayy\u0101m\u012bm_, literally _The Acts_\n(or _Sayings_) _of the Days_. In the Greek Version (the Septuagint)\nChronicles was regarded as supplementary to Samuel and Kings, and so\nreceived the title \u201c[Books of] the Omitted Acts\u201d \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd or \u201cthe\nOmitted Acts of the Kings (_or_ Reigns) of Judah.\u201d This name, moreover,\npassed into the Latin Vulgate, \u201c(_Libri_) _Paralipomen\u014dn_.\u201d The title\n_Chronicles_ seems to be due to a remark made by St Jerome, who,\nin commenting on the Hebrew title, wrote that the book might more\nappropriately be styled the \u201cChronicle of the whole of sacred history\u201d\n(_Prologus in Libros Regum_, edited by Vallarsi, ix. 458). The use of\nthe phrase is also suggested by a similar expression (literally \u201cthe\nbook of the Acts of the Days of...\u201d) found some twenty times in Kings,\nand commonly rendered \u201cthe book of the chronicles of...\u201d e.g. 1 Kings\nxiv. 19. On the whole, _Chronicles_ is a satisfactory title\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 It is, however, open to the objection that an inexperienced\n reader may make the mistake of supposing that these\n references in Kings to \u201cthe book of the chronicles of the\n kings of Israel [Judah]\u201d are references to the canonical\n Chronicles.\n\n_Division._ The division of Chronicles into two books (as in the\nEnglish Versions) probably originated in the Septuagint (LXX.); the\nMSS. A and B both mark the division. It entered the English Version\nthrough the Latin Vulgate. On the other hand, Rabbinical evidence\n(Talmud, _Baba Bathra_ 15a; and the Mas\u014drah) and the Christian Fathers\ntestify that among the Hebrews the book was undivided: so Origen\n(_apud_ Eusebius _Church History_ vi. 25, 2) and Jerome (_Domnioni et\nRogatiano_).\n\n_Position in Canon._ In the English Version Chronicles stands next\nafter Kings, the Historical Books being grouped together. This\narrangement was derived from the Septuagint through the Latin Vulgate.\nThe order of the Hebrew Bible is different. There the books are\narranged in three sections, of which the first contains the Books of\nthe Pentateuch, the second includes the Historical Books from Joshua\nto Kings, while the third (Hebrew \u201cK\u0115th\u016bbh\u012bm\u201d) contains Chronicles.\nThe books of this third section seem to have been the last to receive\nCanonical Authority among the Jews. Kings thus appears to have been\ntaken into the Canon before Chronicles.\n\nIn the Hebrew Bible the \u201cK\u0115th\u016bbh\u012bm\u201d (Hagiographa) are usually arranged\nthus:\u2015\u2015first the Poetical Books (Psalms, Proverbs, Job), next the Five\nRolls or _Megill\u014dth_ (Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes,\nEsther), and lastly the three books Daniel, Ezra\u2012Nehemiah, and\nChronicles. This is the usual Hebrew tradition, though it is surprising\nto find Ezra (which begins with the closing verses of Chronicles) put\nbefore Chronicles. The wording of Matthew xxiii. 35, however, \u201cFrom\nthe blood of Abel the righteous (see Genesis iv. 10 f.) unto the blood\nof Zachariah (see 2 Chronicles xxiv. 20 ff.)\u201d suggests that as early\nas our Lord\u2019s day Chronicles was regarded as the last, just as Genesis\nwas the first, book of the Hebrew Canon. It is probable, therefore,\nthat Chronicles found its way into the Canon _after_ Ezra\u2012Nehemiah,\nthe latter book being needed to represent the post-exilic period of\nthe history, whereas Chronicles covered ground already occupied by the\nbooks of Samuel and Kings.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a010. TEXT AND VERSIONS OF CHRONICLES\n\n_Text._ The Hebrew (Masoretic) text in Chronicles is, on the whole,\nwell preserved, although by no means free from textual errors (compare\n1 Chronicles vi. 28). Many of these occur, as one would expect,\nin the lists of proper names. Olstead (in the _American Journal of\nSemitic Languages_, October 1913) has given reasons for holding that\noccasionally the original text of Chronicles may have suffered from\nassimilation to the text of Samuel\u2012Kings. Further, we note a few\nphrases and passages which seem to be scribal additions (see \u00a7\u00a03,\np. xxii). An interesting scribal omission of late date is noted on\n2 Chronicles xxviii. 20. In passages which are parallel to the older\ncanonical books Chronicles has occasionally preserved a superior\nreading, e.g. 1 Chronicles xx. 4, Hebrew and LXX. \u201cthere arose war\n_at Gezer_\u201d = 2 Samuel xxi. 18, \u201cthere was again war ... _at Gob_\u201d; or\nagain, 1 Chronicles viii. 53, \u201cEshbaal\u201d = 2 Samuel ii. 8 \u201cIshbosheth\u201d;\nor compare 1 Chronicles xiv. 14, note on _go not up_.\n\n_Versions._ (1) _Greek Versions._ What is commonly called the\nSeptuagint (LXX.) of Chronicles is now recognised to be not the\n_original_ LXX., but a later Greek translation, which most scholars\n(especially Torrey, _Ezra Studies_) consider to be the rendering\nof Theodotion. [For criticism of the view that it is Theodotion\u2019s\nrendering see the article by Olstead mentioned above.] In the main\nthis rendering is a close reproduction of the Masoretic text, and of\nlittle value except for determining the official Hebrew text of the\nsecond century. The _old_ LXX., unfortunately, no longer exists for\n1 Chronicles i.\u20122 Chronicles xxxiv.; but for 2 Chronicles xxxv., xxxvi.\nit has been preserved in 1 Esdras i.\u2015\u2015a fact of great good fortune, not\nmerely for the textual criticism of that passage, but for the light it\nsheds on the relations and characteristics of the Greek Versions.\n\n(2) The _Old Latin Version_ was made from the _old_ LXX. which is now\nlost except for the last two chapters of Chronicles, as stated above.\nIt would therefore be of great value for criticism, but alas! only a\nfew fragments survive.\n\nThe later Latin Version, the _Vulgate_, made by Jerome, is of small\nvalue, as it represents only the official Hebrew text.\n\n(3) The _Syriac Version_, known as the Peshit\u1e6da, is of even smaller\nvalue for textual criticism. Unlike the close rendering of other books\nin the Peshit\u1e6da, Chronicles constantly has the characteristics of\na paraphrase rather than a translation. One example will suffice.\nFor \u201cJoel the chief and Shaphat the second,\u201d 1 Chronicles v. 12, the\nPeshit\u1e6da has \u201cAnd Joel went forth at their head and judged them and\ntaught them the scriptures well.\u201d The Peshit\u1e6da is further noteworthy\nfor curious omissions (and substitutions), e.g. 2 Chronicles iv. 10\u201222;\nxi. 5\u2012xii. 12 (for which 1 Kings xii. 25\u201230, followed by 1 Kings xiv.\n1\u20129, is substituted).\n\nFor further information regarding the text and versions of Chronicles,\nsee the edition by Curtis, pp. 35 ff.\n\n\n \u00a7\u00a011. LITERATURE\n\nOf the more recent literature on Chronicles the following is a list\nof the principal works which have been consulted in the preparation of\nthis volume.\n\n J. Wellhausen, _Prolegomena_ (1885), especially chapter vi.\n\n W. H. Bennett, _The Books of Chronicles_ in the _Expositor\u2019s\n Bible_ (1894).\n\n F. Brown, _Chronicles_ in Hastings\u2019 _Dictionary of the Bible_\n (1898).\n\n W. R. Smith and S. R. Driver, _Chronicles_ in the _Encyclopaedia\n Biblica_ (1899).\n\n I. Benzinger, _Die B\u00fccher der Chronik_ (1901).\n\n R. Kittel, _Die B\u00fccher der Chronik_ (1902).\n\n C. F. Kent, _Israel\u2019s Historical and Biographical Narratives_\n (Student\u2019s Old Testament, 1905).\n\n W. R. Harvie-Jellie, _Chronicles_ in the _Century Bible_ (1906).\n\n E. L. Curtis and A. A. Madsen, _Chronicles_ (the International\n Critical Commentary, 1910).\n\n S. R. Driver, _Literature of the Old Testament_, pp. 517\u2012540\n (8th edition 1909).\n\n W. R. Smith and S. A. Cook, _Chronicles_ in the _Encyclopaedia\n Britannica_ (1910).\n\n C. C. Torrey, _Ezra Studies_ (1910).\n\n A. T. Olstead, _Source Study and the Biblical Text_ in the\n _American Journal of Semitic Languages_ (October, 1913).\n\nStudents interested in the Hebrew text should consult Kittel\u2019s edition\nof the Old Testament in Hebrew; Kittel\u2019s _Chronicles in Hebrew_ in _The\nSacred Books of the Old Testament_ (edited by P. Haupt); Torrey\u2019s _Ezra\nStudies_, and the commentary by Curtis and Madsen mentioned above; also\nArno Kropat, \u201cDie Syntax des Autors der Chronik,\u201d in the _Zeitschrift\nf\u00fcr Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft_ (Beihefte) xvi. (1909).\n\n * * * * *\n\nN.B. The commentary on Chronicles according to the text of the\nAuthorised Version was edited in this series by the Rev. Professor\nW.\u00a0E. Barnes, D.D., in 1899. For this new edition which is based on the\nRevised Version the present writer is entirely responsible. He desires\nhere to acknowledge the courtesy of Professor Barnes who has kindly\npermitted the retention of notes from the first edition.\n\n W. A. L. E.\n\n _September 1st, 1915._\n\n\n\n\n THE FIRST BOOK OF\n THE CHRONICLES\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS I.\u2012IX. GENEALOGIES.\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\n\n THE GENEALOGIES OF THE PEOPLES.\n\nThe historical narrative of the books of Chronicles commences in\nchapter x. with the record of the defeat and death of King Saul on\nMt Gilboa.\n\nThe first nine chapters are occupied almost entirely by a series of\ngenealogical lists. Starting from the primeval age, the line is traced\nfrom Adam to the origin of Israel, showing its place among the nations\nof the ancient world. Attention is then confined to the descendants of\nIsrael, amongst whom the genealogies of Judah (particularly, the line\nof David), of Levi, and of Benjamin, are given prominence. Finally the\nancestry of Saul, and a list of inhabitants of Jerusalem is recorded.\n\nThe modern reader is inclined to regard these statistics as the\nleast important section of the book, but the fact that the bare\nlists of names are so foreign to our taste should serve at least as a\nvaluable warning of the difference between our outlook and that of the\nChronicler. It is in the highest degree important to understand the\nmotives which caused the Chronicler to give these lists of names as\nthe fitting introduction to the history, since the same motives operate\nthroughout the book and determine the standpoint from which the entire\nhistory is considered.\n\n(1) In the first place the genealogies were not recorded by the\nChronicler simply for the archaeological interest they possess. They\nserved a most _practical_ purpose, in that they helped to determine\nfor the Jewish community of the Chronicler\u2019s time what families were\nof proper Levitical descent and might claim a share in the privileges\npertaining thereto, and\u2015\u2015on a wider scale\u2015\u2015what families might\njustly be considered to be the pure blood of Israel. How serious the\nconsequences entailed by the absence of a name from such lists might\nbe is well illustrated by Ezra ii. 61\u201263 (= Nehemiah vii. 63\u201265), \u201cthe\nchildren of Habaiah, the children of Hakkoz ... sought their register\namong those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found:\ntherefore were they deemed polluted and put away from the priesthood.\u201d\nOn the other hand the Jew who could successfully trace his ancestry in\nthe great lists knew himself indubitably a member of the chosen people\nand was confident of his part in the covenantal grace and in all those\nhopes which the faith of Israel inspired and sustained.\n\n(2) The practical aspect of these lists was thus essentially connected\nwith high _religious_ sentiment. They were an expression of the\ncontinuity of Israel, a declaration that the Present was one with the\nPast, a witness and an assurance of the unfailing grace of Israel\u2019s God.\nThe genealogies therefore are in perfect harmony with the spirit and\npurpose of the Chronicler\u2019s work\u2015\u2015see the Introduction \u00a7\u00a06.\n\n(3) Finally, in the lists of place-names and genealogies of inhabitants\nof Judah and Jerusalem, various facts of great historical interest are\npreserved\u2015\u2015see Introduction \u00a7\u00a07, pp. xlvii f. and (e.g.) ii. 42 note.\n\nChapter i. contains the genealogies of the earliest age, showing the\norigin of the nations. It concludes with a list of the chiefs of Edom.\nThe names are those given in the genealogies of Genesis i.\u2012xxxvi., but\nthe lists are abbreviated to the utmost by the omission of statements\nof relationship. Evidently the Chronicler was able to assume that the\nconnection between the names was a matter of common knowledge.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (compare Genesis v. 3\u201232).\n A GENEALOGY FROM ADAM TO THE SONS OF NOAH.\n\n \u00b9ADAM, Seth, Enosh; \u00b2Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared;\n\n=1.= _Seth ... Noah_] This genealogy of ten antediluvian patriarchs\nfollows Genesis v. 3\u201232 (P), the \u201cSethite\u201d line as compared with\nGenesis iv. 17\u201224 (J) where the descent is traced through Cain.\nThere is some ancient connection between the list and the Babylonian\ntradition of ten kings before the Flood (see Ryle, _Genesis_, pp. 88 ff.\nin this series). For the symbols J and P, see the Introduction p. xx.\n\n_Enosh_] A poetical word which, like _Adam_ in prose writings, was used\nas a generic term for \u201cman.\u201d\n\n \u00b3Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech; \u2074Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.\n\n=3.= _Enoch_] Hebrew \u1e24an\u00f4kh. In verse 33 the same name is more\ncorrectly rendered Hanoch, but the Revised Version not unwisely has\nhere retained the famous name in the form (derived through the Vulgate\nfrom the LXX.) with which the Authorized Version has made us familiar;\ncompare Genesis iv. 17, and v. 21.\n\n\n =5\u201223.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE NATIONS.\n\nThe table which follows is taken from Genesis x. 2\u201229. It is\ngeographical rather than ethnological, i.e. neighbouring nations are\nregarded as having the same descent. The world as then known is divided\ninto three areas of which that in the north and west is assigned to the\nSons of Japheth (5\u20127), the southern to the Sons of Ham, and the middle\nand eastern to the Sons of Shem (17\u201223). Had the arrangement been\naccording to actual descent the Semitic Zidonians, for instance, would\nnot be described as the offspring of Ham (verse 13).\n\nThe passage, when analysed, divides as follows: 5\u20129 (a general table\nof the descendants of Japheth and Ham), 10\u201216 (an appendix to the\ndescendants of Ham), 17 (a general table of the descendants of Shem),\n18\u201223 (an appendix to the descendants of Shem). Of these four sections,\nthe general tables, verses 5\u20129 and 17, belong to the \u201cPriestly\u201d\nnarrative of the Hexateuch, whilst the two appendices, verses\n10\u201216, 18\u201223, are from the earlier narrative known as J. For a full\nexamination of the many interesting questions raised by this account\nof the origin of the nations known to the Israelites the reader must\nbe referred to the commentaries on Genesis where such discussion is\nappropriate (see Ryle, _Genesis_, in this series; or more fully Skinner,\n_Genesis_, pp. 188 ff.). Here a few remarks of a general character must\nsuffice.\n\nWith the exception of Nimrod the names are those of nations and tribes\n(e.g. Madai [Medes], Javan [Greeks]) or countries (e.g. Mizraim [Egypt])\nor cities (Zidon). The names are eponymous: that is to say \u201ceach nation\nis represented by an imaginary personage bearing its name, who is\ncalled into existence for the purpose of expressing its unity, but is\nat the same time conceived as its real progenitor\u201d; and the relations\nexisting or supposed to exist between the various races and ethnic\ngroups are then set forth under the scheme of a family relationship\nbetween the eponymous ancestors. This procedure may seem strange to us\nbut it was both natural and convenient for a period when men had not\nat their disposal our scientific methods of classification. It must\nhave been specially easy for Semites, like Israel, who in everyday\nlife were accustomed to call a population the \u201csons of\u201d the district\nor town which they inhabited. But in truth the practice was widespread\nin antiquity, and, if a parallel is desired, an excellent one may be\nfound in the Greek traditions respecting the origins of the several\nbranches of the Hellenic race. Whether the ancients believed that these\neponymous ancestors really had lived is somewhat uncertain. Probably\nthey did, although such names as _Rodanim_ (verse 7) and _Ludim_ (verse\n11) where the name is actually left in a plural form (as we might\nsay \u201cLondoners\u201d) makes it difficult to doubt that in some cases the\nconvention was conscious and deliberate. The notion that the chief\nnations of antiquity were differentiated from one another within some\nthree generations of descent from a common ancestor, Noah, is plainly\ninaccurate. Equally untenable is the primary conception assumed in\nthis table that the great races of mankind have come into being simply\nthrough the expansion and subdivision of single families.\n\nIt must not be imagined that these facts in any way destroy the value\nof the table. _Historically_, it is a document of great importance as a\nsystematic record of the racial and geographical beliefs of the Hebrews.\nIts value would be increased could we determine precisely the period\nwhen it was originally drawn up, but unfortunately it is not possible\nto do so with certainty. Arguments based on the resemblance between\nthis table and the nations mentioned in the books of Ezekiel and\nJeremiah are inconclusive; nor does the fact that the general tables\n(verses 5\u20129, 17) now form part of P, the \u201cPriestly\u201d document, help us\ngreatly, for we cannot argue from the date of the document as a whole\nto the date of its component laws or traditions, which of course may\nbe much earlier. _Religiously_, the worth of this table is to be seen\nin the conviction of the fundamental unity of the human race, which\nis here expressed. The significance of this may best be felt if we\ncontrast the Greek traditions which display a keen interest in the\norigins of their own peoples but none at all in that of the barbarians.\nAncient society in general was vitiated by failure to recognise the\nmoral obligation involved in our common humanity. Even Israel did not\nwholly transcend this danger, and its sense of spiritual pre-eminence\nmay have taken an unworthy form in Jewish particularism; but at\nleast, as we here see, there lay beneath the surface the instinct that\nultimately the families of the earth are one, and their God one.\n\n\n =5\u20127= (=Genesis x. 2\u20124).\n THE SONS OF JAPHETH.\n\n \u2075The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan,\n and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.\n\n=5.= _The sons of Japheth_] The writer begins with the northern peoples.\n\n_Gomer_] to be identified with the _Gimirrai_ of the Assyrian monuments,\nthe \u039a\u03b9\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 of the Greeks, who migrated from South Russia into Asia\nMinor (Pontus and Cappadocia) under the pressure of the Scythians\n(Herodotus I. 103; IV. 11, 12; compare Ezekiel xxxviii. 6, Revised\nVersion).\n\n_Magog_] In Ezekiel xxxviii. 2 (Revised Version) judgement is denounced\non \u201cGog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal\u201d\nwho is represented as accompanied in his migration by the \u201chordes\u201d of\nGomer and Togarmah (verse 6), \u201call of them riding upon horses\u201d (verse\n15). Magog represents therefore one of several tribes of northern\nnomads, possibly the Scythians.\n\n_Madai_] i.e. Media or the Medes. Of the many allusions in the Old\nTestament to this famous people, the first is found in 2 Kings xvii. 6;\ncompare also Isaiah xiii. 17; Jeremiah xxv. 25; Esther i. 3; Daniel i.\n9. The Median Empire dates from the 7th century B.C., but the Medes are\nreferred to by Assyrian inscriptions of the 9th century, at which time\nthey seem to occupy the mountainous regions to the south and south-west\nof the Caspian Sea. They were the first Aryan race to play an important\npart in Semitic history.\n\n_Javan_] the Ionians, a branch of the Greek peoples. They were already\nsettled in the Aegean islands and on the west coast of Asia Minor\nat the dawn of Greek history. Being a seafaring nation and having a\nslave-trade with Tyre (Ezekiel xxvii. 13; Joel iii. 6 [_Hebrew_ iv. 6\n\u201cGrecians\u201d]), they became known to Israel at an early date. In some\nlate passages of the Old Testament (e.g. Zechariah ix. 13; Daniel viii.\n21, xi. 2) _Javan_ denotes the world-power of the Greeks, established\nby the conquests of Alexander the Great and maintained in part by his\nsuccessors, in particular the Seleucid kings of Syria.\n\n_Tubal, and Meshech_] compare Isaiah lxvi. 19; Psalms cxx. 5. They are\nmentioned together Ezekiel xxvii. 13, xxxii. 26, xxxviii. 2, 3, xxxix.\n1; and are to be identified with the \u03a4\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03af and \u039c\u03bf\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03af of Herodotus\nIII. 94, who are the \u201cTabali\u201d and \u201cMuski\u201d of the monuments. In the time\nof the later Assyrian Empire they lived as neighbours in the country\nnorth-east of Cilicia, but at a later period the \u03a4\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03af (Tubal)\nlived in Pontus, and the \u039c\u03bf\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03af (Meshech) further East towards the\nCaspian. (The Meshech of this verse is to be distinguished from the\nMeshech son of Shem mentioned in verse 17.)\n\n_Tiras_] Not the Thracians (so Josephus _Antiquities of the Jews_\nI. 6), but most probably the Tyrseni, a piratical people frequenting\nthe coasts and islands of the north Aegean. They are mentioned among\nthe seafarers who assailed Egypt in the reign of Merenptah.\n\n \u2076And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Diphath\u00b9, and Togarmah.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis x. 3, _Riphath_.\n\n=6.= _Ashkenaz_] In Jeremiah li. 27 \u201cthe kingdoms of Ararat, Minni, and\nAshkenaz\u201d are to be summoned against Babylon. The home of the Ashkenaz\nis therefore somewhere in the neighbourhood of Ararat (Armenia); and\nthey are apparently the Asguza of the monuments, and perhaps may be\nidentified with the Scythians.\n\n_Diphath_] The LXX., Vulgate and some Hebrew MSS. have _Riphath_ (so\nalso Genesis x. 3), which is to be preferred. The identity of the place\nor people is not yet ascertained.\n\n_Togarmah_] Perhaps in Armenia, but the evidence is inconclusive. That\nit was a neighbour of Gomer, Tubal, and Meshech appears probable from\nEzekiel xxvii. 14, where Togarmah is mentioned as trading with Tyre in\nhorses and mules. Compare also Ezekiel xxxviii. 6, and the note above\non _Magog_.\n\n \u2077And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and\n Rodanim\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis x. 4, _Dodanim_.\n\n=7.= _Elishah_] Ezekiel (xxvii. 7) addressing Tyre, \u201cBlue and purple\nfrom the isles of Elishah was thine awning.\u201d Elishah has not been\nidentified with certainty. It has been supposed to be _Carthage_.\nAnother suggestion is _Alashiya_ (of the Tell el-Amarna Letters) which\nmay be a Cilician district, or perhaps rather Cyprus; compare the note\non _Kittim_ below.\n\n_Tarshish_] generally now identified with Tartessus, a Phoenician town\nin the south of Spain. This is supported by the various references to\nTarshish as a Tyrian colony rich in minerals and far from Palestine\n(see, e.g. Ezekiel xxvii. 12; Jonah i. 3; Psalms lxxii. 10; 2\nChronicles ix. 21). To identify it with Tarsus, the famous town in\nCilicia, is in some ways attractive, but is on the whole less probable.\n\n_Kittim_] The inhabitants of Cyprus are meant, \u201cKittim\u201d being derived\nfrom Kition (modern _Larnaca_), the name of one of its oldest towns.\nIn later times Kittim (Chittim) is used vaguely of Western islands\n(Jeremiah ii. 10; Ezekiel xxvii. 6) or nations; \u201cthe ships of Kittim\u201d\n(Daniel xi. 30) are the Roman ships; \u201cthe land of Chittim\u201d (\u03a7\u03b5\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03b5\u03af\u03bc,\n1 Maccabees i. 1) is Macedonia (1 Maccabees viii. 5).\n\n_Rodanim_] No doubt the Rhodians are meant; their island was celebrated\neven in the days of Homer. On the spelling _Dodanim_ (Revised Version\nmargin; Genesis x. 4), compare the note on _Diphath_ above. The Hebrew\nletters _r_ (\u05e8) and _d_ (\u05d3) are easily confused.\n\n\n =8, 9= (= Genesis x. 6, 7).\n THE SONS OF HAM.\n\n \u2078The sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, Put, and Canaan.\n\n=8.= _The sons of Ham_] The southern peoples are next enumerated.\n\n_Cush_] The Hebrew name here transliterated _Cush_ is several times\ntranslated \u201cEthiopia\u201d (e.g. 2 Kings xix. 9; Isaiah xviii. 1) no doubt\nrightly. On the inscriptions of Asshur-bani-pal frequent mention is\nmade of Ku-su (Ku-u-su) \u201cEthiopia\u201d in connection with Mu-\u1e63ur \u201cEgypt.\u201d\nThe Cushites were not Negroes but a brown race like the modern Nubians\n(Soudanese). The \u201csons of Cush,\u201d however, seem to be tribes located\nmostly on the Arabian side of the Red Sea, verse 9 below.\n\n_Mizraim_] is without doubt Egypt. In form the word may be dual, and it\nis generally said to mean the two Egypts, Upper and Lower.\n\n_Put_] This people is mentioned among the helpers of Egypt in Jeremiah,\nin Ezekiel (twice), and in Nahum. In Ezekiel xxvii. 10 it appears among\nthe auxiliary troops of Tyre. Put used therefore to be identified with\nthe Libyans of the north coast of Africa, but more probably it denotes\nthe _Punt_ of the Egyptian monuments, i.e. the African coast of the Red\nSea.\n\n_Canaan_] the eponym of the pre-Israelitish population of Palestine\nwest of Jordan. Actual racial affinities are here disregarded or\nunperceived, for the Canaanites (except the Philistines and Phoenicians\non the strip of coastland) were Semites and spoke a language closely\nresembling Hebrew. That they are here reckoned as Hamites and made a\n\u201cbrother\u201d of Egypt is due perhaps in part to the frequent dominations\nof Palestine by Egypt, but more probably to the political and religious\nantagonism between Israel and the Canaanites, which suggested that they\nought to be most closely associated with Egypt, Israel\u2019s traditional\noppressor. Note that in Genesis ix. 25\u201227 (where hostile feeling\nagainst Canaan is prominent) \u201cCanaan\u201d is not said to be the son of Ham,\nbut takes Ham\u2019s place as a son of Noah (Ryle, _Genesis_, p. 127).\n\n \u2079And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabta, and Raama,\n and Sabteca. And the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan.\n\n=9.= _the sons of Cush_] According to some authorities Seba and\nHavilah were tribes or districts on the African coast of the Red Sea,\nwhilst Sabta and Raama and Sabteca were in Arabia. It is somewhat more\nprobable that all (except Seba) were located on the Arabian side of the\nRed Sea.\n\n_Seba_] In Isaiah xliii. 3 and xlv. 14 Seba (the Sabeans) is mentioned\nalong with Egypt and Cush, and in Psalms lxxii. 10 along with Sheba.\nProbably a district on the African side of the Red Sea is meant.\n\n_Sheba, and Dedan_] Also in verse 32, where see note. Sheba is\nfrequently mentioned in the Old Testament (e.g. Jeremiah vi. 20;\n1 Kings x. 1 ff. = 2 Chronicles ix. 1 ff.; Isaiah lx. 6) as a distant\nland, rich in gold, frankincense, and precious stones. It was a\nflourishing and wealthy state, at one period (_circa_ 700 B.C.) the\ncentre of power and civilisation in south Arabia. Dedan was probably\na merchant tribe, specially associated with Sheba (compare Ezekiel\nxxxviii. 13).\n\n\n =10\u201216= (= Genesis x. 8\u201218b).\n APPENDIX. OTHER DESCENDANTS OF HAM.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the\n earth.\n\n=10.= _And Cush begat Nimrod_] From the parallel passages in Genesis (x.\n10, 11) it is apparent that Nimrod is the name of an individual, the\ntraditional founder of the Babylonian-Assyrian Empire. As Cush is here\ncalled the father of Nimrod and in verse 8 is the son of Ham, Hebrew\ntradition would appear to have regarded Hamites as the founders of the\nBabylonian power. Possibly the Redactor of Genesis who _combined_ these\nverses which belong to the tradition of J with verses 5\u20129 which are\nfrom \u201cP\u201d may have thought so. But in the independent \u201cJ\u201d narrative\nit is very probable that Cush, father of Nimrod, represents the third\nor Kassite dynasty (\u039a\u03bf\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9) which held sway in Babylon from about\n1750\u20121200 B.C. Even so, the identification of Nimrod himself remains a\npuzzle, and it is not yet possible to say whether he is a legendary or\nan historical character, or partly both.\n\n_began to be a mighty one in the earth_] i.e. was the first grand\nmonarch (for the idiom, compare Genesis ix. 20). In Genesis x. 9, he is\nfurther and quaintly described as \u201ca mighty hunter before the Lord.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and\n Naphtuhim,\n\n=11.= _Ludim_] reckoned in Jeremiah xlvi. 9 and Ezekiel xxx. 5\n(Revised Version \u201cLud\u201d) among the auxiliary troops of Egypt (_Mizraim_).\nProbably not the Lydians of Asia Minor are meant, but a people of north\nAfrica not yet known. Both this word and _Lehabim_ may be variants for\nthe Libyans, tribes west of Cyrene (compare 2 Chronicles xii. 3, xvi.\n8). See also verse 17, note on _Lud_. Of the _Anamim_, _Naphtuhim_,\nnothing is certainly known.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2and Pathrusim, and Casluhim (from whence came the Philistines\u00b9),\n and Caphtorim.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Pelishtim_.\n\n=12.= _Pathrusim_] the inhabitants of Pathros (Isaiah xi. 11), i.e.\nUpper Egypt.\n\n_Casluhim_] not identified.\n\n_from whence came the Philistines_] Elsewhere (Jeremiah xlvii. 4; Amos\nix. 7; compare Deuteronomy ii. 23) the Philistines are said to have\ncome from Caphtor. It is natural therefore to think that an accidental\ntransposition has taken place, and that this clause, _whence ...\nPhilistines_, originally followed _Caphtorim_. Note, however, that the\nsame order is found in Genesis x. 14.\n\n_Caphtorim_] i.e. the inhabitants of Caphtor, which has usually been\ntaken to mean the island of Crete, but is also plausibly identified\nwith \u201cKeftiu,\u201d the south-west coastlands of Asia Minor. Compare\nMacalister, _The Philistines_, pp. 4 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn, and Heth;\n\n=13.= _Canaan begat_] Of the four sons of Ham\u2015\u2015viz. Cush, Mizraim,\nPut, Canaan\u2015\u2015note that the sons of Put are omitted. After the sons of\nCush (verse 9), and of Mizraim (verse 11), we here pass to the sons of\nCanaan.\n\n_Zidon his firstborn_] From the time of David downwards Tyre takes\nprecedence of Zidon in any mention of the Phoenician cities in the\nOld Testament, but Zidon was the older of the two cities, as is here\nimplied and as the Roman historian Justin (XVIII. 3) asserts. So we\nfind the Phoenicians in the earlier books of the Old Testament called\nZidonians, not Tyrians (e.g. Judges iii. 3; 1 Kings v. 6). Homer also\nrefers not to Tyre but to Zidon.\n\n_Heth_] i.e. the Hittites, a northern non-Semitic race, who from about\n1800\u2012700 B.C. were a great power, extending over part of Asia Minor\nand northern Syria from the Orontes to the Euphrates. The references\nto them in the Old Testament make it probable that Hittite settlements\nwere to be found in various parts of Palestine. This fact and their\ndominant influence, _circa_ 1300 B.C., throughout Canaan and Phoenicia\nprobably accounts for their inclusion as a \u201cson\u201d of Canaan.\n\n \u00b9\u2074and the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite;\n\n=14.= _the Jebusite_] the ancient population of Jerusalem, compare\nJudges i. 21; 2 Samuel v. 6.\n\n_the Amorite_] compare Numbers xiii. 29, xxi. 21; Judges i. 35. The\nname (probably a racial one) was frequently used of the pre-Israelitish\ninhabitants of Canaan (\u201cCanaanites\u201d being the geographical description).\nIn a more restricted sense it was used to denote the people of Sihon,\neast of the Jordan.\n\n \u00b9\u2075and the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite; \u00b9\u2076and the\n Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite.\n\n=15.= _the Hivite_] In Joshua xi. 3, the Hivites are placed in the\nextreme north of the land, \u201cthe Hivite under Hermon,\u201d but the word\nmay be an error for Hittite (see above verse 13). In Joshua ix. 7 and\nGenesis xxxiv. 2 they are located at Gibeon and Shechem. The _Arkite_\nand _Sinite_ lived in Lebanon, the _Arvadite_ (compare Ezekiel xxvii.\n8) on the sea-coast north of Gebal (Byblus), the _Zemarite_ a little to\nthe south of the Arvadite, and the _Hamathite_ furthest to the north on\nthe Orontes.\n\n\n =17= (= Genesis x. 22, 23).\n THE SONS OF SHEM.\n\n \u00b9\u2077The sons of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arpachshad, and Lud,\n and Aram, and Uz, and Hul, and Gether, and Meshech\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis x. 23, _Mash_.\n\n=17.= _The sons of Shem_] These occupied the middle geographical \u201czone.\u201d\n\n_Elam_] is the name of a land and nation north of the Persian Gulf\nand east of Babylonia, and is often referred to in the Old Testament.\nThough settled by Semites at a very early date, it was subsequently,\n_circa_ 2280 B.C., possessed by a non-Semitic race, who even extended\ntheir power over Babylonia itself. The inclusion of Elam among the\nSemites is doubtless due to its proximity to Asshur, and, though not\nstrictly correct, is very natural.\n\n_Asshur_] The Assyrians, who are so frequently referred to in the Old\nTestament, were mainly, if not entirely Semitic: a martial and ruthless\npeople whose conquests in the 14th\u20127th centuries have made them\nworld-famous.\n\n_Arpachshad_] a somewhat obscure name. In the last part (_chshad_)\nthe same consonants occur as in the name \u201cChasdim,\u201d the \u201cChaldees\u201d of\nthe Old Testament. _Possibly_ two names have been run together, the\nsecond being that of the Chaldees or Chaldeans, a Semitic race who from\n_circa_ 900 B.C. dominated Babylonia, assimilating with the earlier\nSemitic inhabitants. This conjecture has some support in the surprising\nfact that the Chaldeans are not otherwise mentioned in the table; it\nis opposed by the fact that _Arpachshad_ occurs elsewhere, verse 24;\nGenesis x. 24, xi. 10 ff.\n\n_Lud_] the name suggests the Lydians, but how this non-Semitic people\nsituated on the west coast of Asia Minor comes to be included with\nAsshur and Aram as a son of Shem is a mystery. Possibly therefore a\nSemitic region, called _Lubdu_, between Tigris and Euphrates is meant.\n\n_Aram_] the \u201cSyrians\u201d of the Authorized Version; better called Arameans.\nThey were widely settled in the lands to the north and north-east\nof Palestine, with important centres in Damascus (Syria proper) and\nthe north of the Euphrates valley (the _Aram-Naharaim_ of the Old\nTestament). So great and lasting was their influence on Israel that\nthe Aramean dialect eventually superseded Hebrew and was the ordinary\nlanguage of Palestine in the time of Christ.\n\n_Uz_] From Genesis x. 23 it appears that in Chronicles the words \u201cAnd\nthe children of Aram\u00b9\u201d have dropped out, so that \u201cUz\u201d etc. appear as\nthe immediate descendants of Shem.\n\n \u00b9 The Alexandrine MS. (A) of the LXX. has the words.\n\nNeither Uz nor the three following names have been satisfactorily\nidentified. For \u201cMeshech\u201d Genesis x. 23 (Hebrew but _not_ LXX.) reads\n\u201cMash.\u201d\n\n\n =18\u201223= (= Genesis x. 24\u201229).\n APPENDIX TO THE SONS OF SHEM. SOUTH ARABIAN TRIBES.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Arpachshad begat Shelah, and Shelah begat Eber.\n\n=18.= _Eber_] The Hebrew word usually means \u201cthe land beyond\u201d and\nmay have originated as a personification of the population beyond the\nEuphrates. It is further possible that Eber is an eponym, not merely of\nthe Hebrews, but of the Habiri, a much wider stock of Semitic nomads,\nof whom the Hebrews formed an element, and who overran and harassed the\nsettled peoples of Palestine in the fifteenth century B.C.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was\n Peleg; for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother\u2019s\n name was Joktan.\n\n=19.= _two sons_] one (Peleg) representing, roughly speaking, the\nnorthern or Mesopotamian Semites; the other (Joktan), the south Arabian\ntribes.\n\n_Peleg_] see below on verse 25.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Joktan begat Almodad, and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and\n Jerah; \u00b2\u00b9and Hadoram, and Uzal, and Diklah; \u00b2\u00b2and Ebal\u00b9, and\n Abimael, and Sheba; \u00b2\u00b3and Ophir, and Havilah, and Jobab. All\n these were the sons of Joktan.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis x. 28, _Obal_.\n\n=20.= _Joktan begat Almodad_] All the names of the sons of Joktan here\ngiven, so far as they have been identified, represent peoples situated\nin south Arabia or on the west coast of the Red Sea lying over against\nsouth Arabia. The only familiar name is that of the unidentified Ophir,\nwhich possibly but not certainly may be the \u201cEl Dorado\u201d to which\nSolomon sent his fleet for gold.\n\n\n =24\u201227.=\n THE DESCENT OF ABRAHAM FROM SHEM.\n\nThese verses are compressed within the smallest limits from Genesis xi.\n10\u201226. For another example of this extreme abbreviation compare verses\n1\u20124 (= Genesis v. 3\u201232).\n\n \u00b2\u2074Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah; \u00b2\u2075Eber, Peleg, Reu; \u00b2\u2076Serug, Nahor,\n Terah; \u00b2\u2077Abram (the same is Abraham).\n\n=25.= _Peleg_] the name perhaps signifies \u201cDivision\u201d (see verse 19),\nand may refer to some great period of migration among the Semitic\ntribes.\n\n\n =28\u201231= (= Genesis xxv. 12\u201216).\n THE DESCENT OF THE ISHMAELITE TRIBES FROM ABRAHAM\n\n \u00b2\u2078The sons of Abraham; Isaac, and Ishmael.\n \u00b2\u2079These are their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael,\n Nebaioth; then Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam,\n\n=29.= _Nebaioth_] Compare Isaiah lx. 7.\n\n_Kedar_] Isaiah xxi. 13\u201217.\n\n \u00b3\u2070Mishma, and Dumah, Massa; Hadad, and Tema,\n\n=30.= _Dumah_] Isaiah xxi. 11.\n\n_Massa_] Proverbs xxxi. 1 (Revised Version margin).\n\n_Hadad_] The name begins with the Hebrew letter _\u1e24\u0113th_ and therefore\ndiffers from the Hadad of verse 46 and of verse 50 and of 2 Chronicles\nxvi. 2 in which the first letter is _H\u0113_, a softer guttural than _\u1e24eth_.\n\n_Tema_] Isaiah xxi. 14.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These are the sons of Ishmael.\n\n=31.= _Jetur, Naphish_] compare v. 18\u201222.\n\n\n =32, 33= (= Genesis xxv. 1\u20124).\n THE DESCENT OF ARABIAN TRIBES FROM ABRAHAM THROUGH KETURAH\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And the sons of Keturah, Abraham\u2019s concubine: she bare\n Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and\n Shuah. And the sons of Jokshan; Sheba, and Dedan.\n\n=32.= _Keturah_] called a _wife_ of Abraham in Genesis xxv. 1. The\nChronicler by calling her a concubine may imply that he considered that\nthe tribes descended from her were not so closely akin to Israel as the\nIshmaelites, or possibly he held that Sarah ought to be the only wife\nof Abraham, and \u201ccorrects\u201d his source accordingly.\n\n_Medan_, _Midian_] Kindred tribes often bore names only slightly\ndiffering in form.\n\n_Midian_] In Judges viii. 14 the Midianites are reckoned as Ishmaelites.\n\n_Sheba, and Dedan_] Sheba and Dedan in verse 9 (which belongs to\nthe same source P) are included among the Hamitic peoples. Doubtless\nthe names in the present passage, which comes from J, refer to the\nsame tribes; but J follows a different tradition as to their origin.\nPossibly there is truth in both views, and the people of Sheba were of\nmixed African and Arabian descent.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epher, and Hanoch, and\n Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the sons of Keturah.\n\n=33.= _Ephah_] Isaiah lx. 6.\n\n_Hanoch_] as Genesis xxv. 4. Compare verse 3.\n\n\n =34\u201237= (compare Genesis xxxvi. 10\u201214).\n THE DESCENT OF THE TRIBES OF EDOM FROM ABRAHAM.\n\n \u00b3\u2074And Abraham begat Isaac. The sons of Isaac; Esau, and Israel.\n \u00b3\u2075The sons of Esau; Eliphaz, Reuel, and Jeush, and Jalam, and\n Korah.\n\n=34.= _Esau_] \u201cEsau is Edom,\u201d Genesis xxxvi. 1, 8.\n\n \u00b3\u2076The sons of Eliphaz; Teman, and Omar, Zephi\u00b9, and Gatam,\n Kenaz, and Timna, and Amalek. \u00b3\u2077The sons of Reuel; Nahath,\n Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xxxvi. 11, _Zepho_.\n\n=36.= _Teman_] Amos i. 11, 12; Habakkuk iii. 13. The word means _South_,\nand is applied in the first passage to Edom itself, in the second to\nthe wilderness of Edom, both being south of Canaan.\n\n_Kenaz_] Other references (Judges i. 13, iii. 9, 11) show a close\nconnection with Caleb, which in turn implies that the Calebites were\nclosely related to the Edomites (compare iv. 13).\n\n_Amalek_] the eponymous ancestor of the Amalekites who lived in the\nsouth and south-east of Palestine, see iv. 42 f.\n\n\n =38\u201242= (compare Genesis xxxvi. 20\u201228).\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE HORITE INHABITANTS OF SEIR.\n\n \u00b3\u2078And the sons of Seir; Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah,\n and Dishon and Ezer and Dishan. \u00b3\u2079And the sons of Lotan; Hori\n and Homam\u00b9: and Timna was Lotan\u2019s sister.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xxxvi. 22, _Hemam_.\n\n=38.= _The sons of Seir_] Chronicles omits the further description\ngiven in Genesis \u201cthe Horite, the inhabitants of the land,\u201d words which\nshow clearly that these \u201csons of Seir\u201d were not descendants of Esau,\nbut aboriginal inhabitants of the land.\n\n_Lotan_] perhaps to be connected with Lot, a name anciently associated\nwith the land or people dwelling east of the Jordan (compare Genesis\nxix. 30).\n\n \u2074\u2070The sons of Shobal; Alian\u00b9 and Manahath and Ebal, Shephi\u00b2 and\n Onam. And the sons of Zibeon; Aiah and Anah. \u2074\u00b9The sons of Anah;\n Dishon. And the sons of Dishon; Hamran\u00b3 and Eshban and Ithran\n and Cheran. \u2074\u00b2The sons of Ezer; Bilhan and Zaavan, Jaakan\u2074. The\n sons of Dishan; Uz and Aran.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xxxvi. 23, _Alvan_.\n\n \u00b2 In Genesis xxxvi. 23, _Shepho_.\n\n \u00b3 In Genesis xxxvi. 26, _Hemdan_.\n\n \u2074 In Genesis xxxvi. 27, _and Akan_.\n\n=40.= _Aiah and Anah_] See Genesis xxxvi. 24.\n\n\n =43\u201251a= (compare Genesis xxxvi. 31\u201239).\n THE EARLY KINGS OF EDOM.\n\n \u2074\u00b3Now these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom,\n before there reigned any king over the children of Israel: Bela\n the son of Beor; and the name of his city was Dinhabah. \u2074\u2074And\n Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his\n stead. \u2074\u2075And Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites\n reigned in his stead.\n\n=43.= _kings_] Note that the kings are of different families and\nlocalities. They may be compared with the \u201cjudges\u201d of early Israel.\n\n_in the land of Edom_] In early times the mountainous region of Seir,\nextending from the south-east of the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Akaba,\nbut the precise territory of the Edomites is uncertain and of course\nmust have varied from time to time. In the post-exilic period Edomites\n(Idumeans) pressed up into the south of Judah (compare ii. 42), and\nEdom (Idumea) continued to play an important and often sinister part\nin the history of Israel till long after the Chronicler\u2019s lifetime.\nSee (e.g.) 1 Maccabees v. 65; 2 Maccabees x. 14\u201217. The Herods were of\nEdomite descent.\n\n_before ... Israel_] i.e. before Saul; or possibly \u201cbefore David,\u201d if\nthe phrase means before the reign of the first Israelitish king over\nEdom. For the use made of this statement in the discussion of the date\nof the Hexateuch, see Chapman, _Introduction to the Pentateuch_, p. 40,\nin this series.\n\n_Bela the son of Beor_] possibly the same as the familiar Balaam son of\nBeor, the consonants of the names differing in Hebrew only by the final\n_m_. See, however, Gray, _Numbers (International Critical Commentary)_,\npp. 315, 324.\n\n \u2074\u2076And Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, which smote\n Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his stead: and the name\n of his city was Avith. \u2074\u2077And Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah\n reigned in his stead.\n\n=46.= _smote Midian in the field of Moab_] An isolated historical\nnotice, interesting as showing the power of Edom at some period. The\nMidianites centred round the lands east of the Gulf of Akaba, but\nbands of them were constantly pushing northwards and harassing the\nterritories of Edom, Moab, and Israel (compare Numbers xxii. 4; Judges\nvi.; etc.).\n\n \u2074\u2078And Samlah died, and Shaul of Rehoboth by the River reigned in\n his stead. \u2074\u2079And Shaul died, and Baal-hanan the son of Achbor\n reigned in his stead.\n\n=48.= _Rehoboth by the River_] not \u201cthe River,\u201d _par excellence_ (i.e.\nthe Euphrates), as the Revised Version translators supposed; but either\nthe _Wady el-Arish_, the stream on the boundary of Egypt or Palestine;\nor else a river in north Edom, Rehoboth being distinguished from other\nplaces of the same name by being the city on its banks.\n\n \u2075\u2070And Baal-hanan died, and Hadad\u00b9 reigned in his stead; and the\n name of his city was Pai\u00b2: and his wife\u2019s name was Mehetabel,\n the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Me-zahab.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xxxvi. 39, _Hadar_.\n\n \u00b2 In Genesis xxxvi. 39, _Pau_.\n\n=50.= _Hadad_] As in verse 46; in Genesis xxxvi. 39, \u201cHadar.\u201d Possibly\nthe king whom David overthrew, 2 Samuel viii. 14, compare 1 Kings xi.\n14 (perhaps a son of this Hadad).\n\n \u2075\u00b9And Hadad died.\n\n=51a.= _And Hadad died_] repeated by a copyist\u2019s error from verse 47;\nthe words are not found in Genesis.\n\n\n =51b\u201254= (compare Genesis xxxvi. 40\u201243).\n THE \u201cDUKES\u201d OF EDOM.\n\n And the dukes of Edom were; duke Timna, duke Aliah\u00b9, duke\n Jetheth; \u2075\u00b2duke Oholibamah, duke Elah, duke Pinon; \u2075\u00b3duke Kenaz,\n duke Teman, duke Mibzar; \u2075\u2074duke Magdiel, duke Iram. These are\n the dukes of Edom.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xxxvi. 40, _Alvah_.\n\n=51b.= _dukes_] The word means \u201cleader of a thousand.\u201d The list which\nfollows is probably topographical, not chronological. It seems to give\nthe names of the districts into which Edom was divided at the time when\nthe list was drawn up.\n\n_duke Timna_, etc.] Render, =the duke of Timna=, etc.\n\n_Aliah_] In Genesis xxxvi. 40, \u201cAlvah.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS II.\u2012VIII.\n THE GENEALOGIES OF THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL.\n\n\nAttention is now narrowed down to those in the true line of descent,\nfrom Abraham through Isaac (\u201cin Isaac shall thy seed be called,\u201d\nGenesis xxi. 12) and from Isaac through Jacob = Israel, Genesis xxxii.\n28 (compare Genesis xxvi. 2\u20124).\n\nThe Chronicler deals very unequally with the tribes in their\ngenealogies; as the following table shows:\n\n ii. 1\u2012iv. 23. Judah (102 verses).\n\n iv. 24\u201243. Simeon (20 verses).\n\n v. 1\u201226. Reuben, Gad, and Eastern Manasseh (26 verses).\n\n vi. 1\u201281. Levi (81 verses).\n\n vii. 1\u201240. Issachar, Zebulun, and Dan (according to a correction\n of the text, vii. 6\u201211, and 12), Naphtali, Eastern\n Manasseh (again), Ephraim, and Asher (40 verses).\n\n viii. 1\u201240. Benjamin (40 verses).\n\nIt may easily be seen that the tribes in which the Chronicler is really\ninterested are the three southern tribes, Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin,\ntogether with the priestly tribe, Levi.\n\nThe order in which the tribes are mentioned is geographical, Judah and\nSimeon the southern tribes first, then the eastern tribes, Reuben, Gad,\nManasseh; then (conveniently) Levi, and then the northern tribes of\nwestern Palestine, ending with Benjamin (viii., ix. 35\u201244) and the list\nof inhabitants of Jerusalem (in ix. 1\u201234).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n\n\n =1, 2= (compare Genesis xxxv. 22b\u201226).\n THE SONS OF ISRAEL.\n\n \u00b9These are the sons of Israel; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah,\n Issachar and Zebulun; \u00b2Dan, Joseph and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad\n and Asher.\n\n\n =II. 3\u2012IV. 23.=\n GENEALOGIES OF JUDAH.\n\n\n =3\u201217.=\n DESCENDANTS OF JUDAH TO THE SONS OF JESSE.\n\n \u00b3The sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah: which three\n were born unto him of Bath-shua the Canaanitess. And Er, Judah\u2019s\n firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and he slew him.\n \u2074And Tamar his daughter in law bare him Perez and Zerah. All the\n sons of Judah were five. \u2075The sons of Perez; Hezron and Hamul.\n\n=5.= _The sons of Perez; Hezron and Hamul_] So Genesis xlvi. 12. The\nonly reference in the Old Testament to Hamulites is Numbers xxvi. 21.\nOn the other hand Hezron, a south Judean tribe (Joshua xv. 3), is\na clan of the first importance in the genealogies. From Hezron are\ndescended not only the family of David (verse 15), but also the great\nCalebite and Jerahmeelite clans (verses 18\u201224, 25\u201233, etc.). The name\n_Hezron_ might bear the significance \u201can enclosed place\u201d as opposed\nto movable encampments, and _Atarah_ (verse 26) who is said to be the\nmother of certain Jerahmeelite families has much the same meaning. Both\nnames therefore may not be eponymous either of individuals or places,\nbut may originate in the desire to preserve the fact that the families\nnamed as their sons were nomads who had abandoned wandering for settled\nlife. If so, it might help to explain the fact that Hezron (compare\n_Carmi_, ii. 7, iv. 1, v. 3) is also mentioned as a son of Reuben (v. 3;\nGenesis xlvi. 9, etc.).\n\n \u2076And the sons of Zerah; Zimri\u00b9, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol,\n and Dara\u00b2: five of them in all.\n\n \u00b9 In Joshua vii. 1, _Zabdi_.\n\n \u00b2 Many ancient authorities read, _Darda_. See 1 Kings iv. 31.\n\n=6.= _the sons of Zerah_] This genealogy appears only in Chronicles.\n\n_Zimri_] LXX. (B) \u0396\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03af (\u03b2 being merely euphonic) here and also\nJoshua vii. 1 where Hebrew has \u201cZabdi.\u201d LXX. is probably right in\nidentifying the two. Either form might arise from the other by easy\ntextual corruption.\n\n_Ethan ... Dara_] Read, =Darda= with Vulgate, Targum, Peshit\u1e6da The\nsame four names in the same order occur 1 Kings iv. 31 as the names\nof wise men whom Solomon surpassed in wisdom. They are there called\nsons of \u201cMahol\u201d who may have been either a nearer or remoter ancestor\nthan Zerah. Ethan however is there called the Ezrahite (= probably\n\u201cson of Zerah\u201d). [Psalms lxxxviii., lxxxix. bear respectively the names\n\u201cHeman the Ezrahite,\u201d \u201cEthan the Ezrahite,\u201d but these (it seems) were\n_Levites_ (compare xv. 17, 19, where see note).]\n\n \u2077And the sons of Carmi; Achar\u00b9, the troubler of Israel, who\n committed a trespass in the devoted thing. \u2078And the sons of\n Ethan; Azariah.\n\n \u00b9 In Joshua vii. 1, _Achan_.\n\n=7.= _the sons of Carmi_] Carmi is probably to be taken as the son of\nZimri (= Zabdi, Joshua vii. 1). Targum however has \u201cCarmi who is Zimri.\u201d\nSee note on _Zimri_, verse 6.\n\n_Achar_] This form of the name (instead of \u201cAchan,\u201d Joshua vii. 1) is\nused by the Chronicler to bring out better the play on the Hebrew word\nfor \u201ctroubler.\u201d The Hebrew runs, \u201cAchar ocher Israel.\u201d\n\n \u2079The sons also of Hezron, that were born unto him; Jerahmeel,\n and Ram, and Chelubai.\n\n=9.= _Jerahmeel_] For his descendants see verses 25\u201241. The descendants\nof his younger brother Ram are given first. They purport to be the\nancestry of David and his family.\n\n_Chelubai_] Another form of \u201cCaleb\u201d; see note on verse 42.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince\n of the children of Judah; \u00b9\u00b9and Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma\n begat Boaz; \u00b9\u00b2and Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse;\n\n=10.= _Ram_] The descent of David from Judah is given also in Ruth iv.\n18\u201222 and Matthew i. 3\u20126. _Ram_ as a clan parallel with the great clans\nof Caleb and Jerahmeel is strange; for it is not known otherwise in\nthe Old Testament Further, as the descendants of Ram given in verses\n10\u201212 are the family tree of David (contrast the clans and cities in\nthe lines of Caleb and Jerahmeel) it may be supposed that Ram owes his\nposition here simply to the Chronicler\u2019s desire to incorporate Ruth iv.\n19, where also this pedigree of David is given. Note also that in verse\n25 a _Ram_ is mentioned as a son of Jerahmeel and grandson of Hezron.\n\n_Nahshon, prince_, etc.] See Numbers i. 4, 7, ii. 3.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second,\n and Shimea the third;\n\n=13.= _Shimea_] so also xx. 7; but \u201cShammah\u201d 1 Samuel xvi. 9.\n\n \u00b9\u2074Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth;\n\n=14.= _Nethanel_] the same name as Nathanael (John i. 45). The fourth,\nfifth and sixth brothers are not elsewhere named.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:\n\n=15.= _David the seventh_] Jesse had eight sons (1 Samuel xvii. 12;\ncompare xvi. 10, 11). Here one seems deliberately passed over, perhaps\nbecause he had no children. (The Elihu \u201cone of David\u2019s brethren\u201d of\n1 Chronicles xxvii. 18 is probably to be identified with Eliab and not\nto be regarded as an eighth brother.)\n\n \u00b9\u2076and their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. And the sons of\n Zeruiah; Abishai\u00b9, and Joab, and Asahel, three.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Abshai_.\n\n=16.= _sons of Zeruiah_] Joab and his brothers are always thus named\nafter their mother; perhaps their father died while they were young,\nor we may have a relic here of the ancient method of tracing kinship\nthrough the mother.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And Abigail bare Amasa: and the father of Amasa was Jether the\n Ishmaelite.\n\n=17.= _the Ishmaelite_] 2 Samuel xvii. 25, \u201cthe Israelite,\u201d an error\nyielding no satisfactory sense.\n\n\n =18\u201224= (compare verses 42\u201255.)\n DESCENDANTS OF CALEB.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Caleb the son of Hezron begat _children_ of Azubah _his_\n wife, and of Jerioth: and these were her sons; Jesher, and\n Shobab, and Ardon. \u00b9\u2079And Azubah died, and Caleb took unto him\n Ephrath, which bare him Hur.\n\n=18.= _Caleb_] a clan dwelling in southern Judea, and probably distinct\nfrom Judah in the time of David (1 Samuel xxv. 3, xxx. 14). Other\nreferences to them or rather their reputed founder Caleb ben Jephunneh\nthe Kenizzite (Numbers xxxii. 12; Joshua xiv. 6, 14; 1 Chronicles i.\n36, where see note on _Kenaz_) point to an original connection with\nthe Edomites. Their importance in these lists is explained by the fact\nthat they were incorporated in Judah, and, after the exile, occupied\ntownships close to Jerusalem (verses 50\u201255) \u201cforming possibly the bulk\nof the tribe in post-exilic Judah, since the Chronicler knows so few\nother families\u201d (Curtis, _Chronicles_ p. 89). See also W.\u00a0R. Smith,\n_Old Testament in the Jewish Church_, p. 279 _ad fin._\n\n_begat_ children _of Azubah_ his _wife, and of Jerioth_] the Hebrew\nseems to be corrupt. Read perhaps =begat children of Azubah, his wife,\ndaughter of Jerioth=; or =took Azubah the wife of Jerioth=. The name\n_Azubah_ = _forsaken_ is significant: see the note on verse 42, _Caleb_,\n_ad fin._\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Hur begat Uri, and Uri begat Bezalel.\n\n=20.= _Bezalel_] the Chronicler is naturally pleased to give prominence\nin his list to Bezalel, who in Exodus xxx. (P) is mentioned as the\nartificer of the Tabernacle.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the\n father of Gilead; whom he took _to wife_ when he was threescore\n years old; and she bare him Segub.\n\n=21.= The table of Caleb is broken off at this point to introduce\nverses 21\u201223 a statement of further descendants of Hezron (verse 9) by\nanother wife, the daughter of Machir. The interruption is not unnatural,\nfor it is convenient to refer to Hezron\u2019s \u201cson of old age\u201d immediately\nbefore the notice of his death (verse 24).\n\n_Machir_] the most important clan of Manasseh (compare Numbers xxvi.\n29; Judges v. 14). The affinity of Judean Hezronites with members of\nthe tribe of Manasseh, implied by this verse, is surprising. Whether\nthe tradition has a basis in fact, or arose through some genealogical\nconfusion, cannot as yet be determined. There is however considerable\nevidence in favour of the view that the relationship between Machir and\nCaleb is at least \u201cno isolated detail, still less is it the invention\nof the Chronicler\u2019s age,\u201d and there may be real historical ground for a\ntradition that besides the northern movement of the Hezronites upwards\nto Judah there was also at some time a movement across the northern\nend of Edom into the lands east of Jordan, ending in the settlements\nof Machir and Jair in Gilead here recorded; compare Numbers xxxii. 39,\nand for discussion of the problem see Cook, _Notes on Old Testament\nHistory_, pp. 92, 93, etc.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Segub begat Jair, who had three and twenty cities in the\n land of Gilead.\n\n=22.= _Jair_] one of the Judges (Judges x. 3, 4 where thirty cities,\nnot twenty-three, are assigned him).\n\n_the land of Gilead_] This name is sometimes restricted to that part of\nthe land east of Jordan which lies south of the wady Yarmuk. Here, as\noften, it is applied to all the land east of Jordan occupied by Israel.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And Geshur and Aram took the towns\u00b9 of Jair from them, with\n Kenath, and the villages\u00b2 thereof, even threescore cities. All\n these were the sons of Machir the father of Gilead.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Havvoth-jair_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _daughters_.\n\n=23.= _And Geshur and Aram_] Geshur was an Aramean kingdom east of\nJordan on the north-east border of Manasseh. Aram, commonly translated\n\u201cSyria\u201d or \u201cthe Syrians,\u201d probably here signifies the kingdom of which\nDamascus was the capital. The conquest of Manassite territory by the\nArameans (\u201cSyrians\u201d) here described probably took place before the days\nof Ahab, for in his reign they were already established as far south as\nRamoth-gilead (1 Kings xxii. 3).\n\n_the towns of Jair_] note margin _Havvoth-jair_, compare Deuteronomy\niii. 14; Judges x. 4. The name perhaps means \u201cthe tent-villages of\nJair\u201d (Arabic _\u1e24\u012dv\u00e2_ = \u201ca collection of tents near together\u201d).\n\n \u00b2\u2074And after that Hezron was dead in Caleb-ephrathah, then Abijah\n Hezron\u2019s wife bare him Ashhur the father of Tekoa.\n\n=24.= _And after that Hezron was dead in Caleb-ephrathah_] The Hebrew\nis certainly corrupt, but can easily be emended with the help of\nthe LXX. Read =And after Hezron was dead Caleb went in to Ephrath=\n(verse 19) =his father Hezron\u2019s wife and she bare him=, etc. Ephrath\n(= Ephrathah, verse 50, iv. 4) is a name of Bethlehem (Ruth iv. 11;\nMicah v. 2). \u201cThe taking of a father\u2019s wife signified a claim to\ninherit the father\u2019s possessions (compare 2 Samuel xvi. 22), and the\nphrase here expresses the legitimacy of Caleb\u2019s residence in northern\nJudea\u201d (see note on verse 42).\n\n_Ashhur_] compare iv. 4, 5. Ashhur might be a younger brother of Hur\n(verses 19, 50); but quite possibly they are one and the same (compare\nthe contraction of Jehoahaz into Ahaz); see also iv. 5.\n\n_the father of Tekoa_] i.e. the founder of the town or the eponymous\nancestor of its inhabitants. For _Tekoa_ see 2 Chronicles xx. 20, note.\n\n\n =25\u201241.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE JERAHMEELITES.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And the sons of Jerahmeel the firstborn of Hezron were Ram the\n firstborn, and Bunah, and Oren, and Ozem, Ahijah.\n\n=25.= _Jerahmeel_] In David\u2019s time they were, like Caleb, a\nsemi-nomadic clan in the south of Judah; compare 1 Samuel xxvii. 10;\nxxx. 29. They shared in the northern movements of Caleb (see note\non verse 42), and eventually formed part of the post-exilic Jewish\ncommunity; hence their records do not appear in earlier parts of the\nOld Testament, but are known to the Chronicler.\n\n_Ozem, Ahijah_] By a slight change in the Hebrew we get =Ozem his\nbrother= (so LXX.); compare xxvi. 20 for a similar confusion of reading.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And Jerahmeel had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she\n was the mother of Onam. \u00b2\u2077And the sons of Ram the firstborn\n of Jerahmeel were Maaz, and Jamin, and Eker. \u00b2\u2078And the sons of\n Onam were Shammai, and Jada: and the sons of Shammai; Nadab, and\n Abishur. \u00b2\u2079And the name of the wife of Abishur was Abihail; and\n she bare him Ahban, and Molid. \u00b3\u2070And the sons of Nadab; Seled,\n and Appaim: but Seled died without children\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _sons_.\n\n=26.= _Atarah_] see note on Hezron, verse 5.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And the sons of Appaim; Ishi. And the sons of Ishi; Sheshan.\n And the sons of Sheshan; Ahlai. \u00b3\u00b2And the sons of Jada the\n brother of Shammai; Jether, and Jonathan: and Jether died\n without children\u00b9. \u00b3\u00b3And the sons of Jonathan; Peleth, and Zaza.\n These were the sons of Jerahmeel.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _sons_.\n\n=31.= _the sons of Sheshan; Ahlai_] Ahlai is perhaps a gentilic name,\nnot the name of an individual, since in verse 34 Sheshan is said to\nhave had \u201cno sons, but daughters.\u201d More probably however the Chronicler\nis using a different source for verses 34\u201241.\n\n \u00b3\u2074Now Sheshan had no sons, but daughters. And Sheshan had a\n servant, an Egyptian, whose name was Jarha.\n\n=34.= _an Egyptian_] Hebrew Mi\u1e63ri. Render probably =a Mu\u1e63rite=, i.e.\ninhabitant of the north Arabian district to the south of Palestine,\nknown as Mu\u1e63ri and apparently confused at times with Mi\u1e63raim (Egypt).\nFor some suggestive conjectures regarding this table of Jarha\u2019s\ndescendants see S.\u00a0A. Cook, _Encyclopedia Biblica_ II. 2364.\n\n \u00b3\u2075And Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha his servant to wife;\n and she bare him Attai. \u00b3\u2076And Attai begat Nathan, and Nathan\n begat Zabad; \u00b3\u2077and Zabad begat Ephlal, and Ephlal begat Obed;\n \u00b3\u2078and Obed begat Jehu, and Jehu begat Azariah; \u00b3\u2079and Azariah\n begat Helez, and Helez begat Eleasah; \u2074\u2070and Eleasah begat Sismai,\n and Sismai begat Shallum; \u2074\u00b9and Shallum begat Jekamiah, and\n Jekamiah begat Elishama.\n\n=35.= _Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha_] This was equivalent to\nmaking his servant his heir. Thus Abraham at first (Genesis xv. 2,\n3) regarded Eliezer his steward as his heir. The list of thirteen\ndescendants of Jarha ending with Elishama (verse 41) is perhaps a\nproper genealogy: at least the names may be those of individuals,\nalthough it is impossible to say why this pedigree of Elishama should\nhave been so carefully preserved (so Curtis). On the other hand Cook\n(see previous note) regards _Jarha_ as perhaps an eponym of _Jerahmeel_,\nand, connecting _Sheshan_ with the Hebronite _Sheshai_, thinks the\ngenealogy may signify a northward movement of Jerahmeel from Mu\u1e63ri to\nthe district of Hebron.\n\n\n =42\u201249= (compare verses 18\u201224).\n THE DESCENDANTS OF CALEB.\n\n \u2074\u00b2And the sons of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel were Mesha\n his firstborn, which was the father of Ziph; and the sons of\n Mareshah the father of Hebron. \u2074\u00b3And the sons of Hebron; Korah,\n and Tappuah, and Rekem, and Shema. \u2074\u2074And Shema begat Raham, the\n father of Jorkeam; and Rekem begat Shammai.\n\n=42.= _Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel_] Called _Chelubai_ (verse 9) and\n_Caleb the son of Hezron_ (verse 18). As eponym of the tribe Caleb is\ndescribed as \u201cson\u201d of Hezron \u201cson\u201d of Judah, and of course is not to\nbe distinguished from the Caleb son of Jephunneh who is classed as a\nKenizzite in various passages (iv. 15; Numbers xiii. 6; Joshua xiv. 6).\n\nImportant features of the fortunes of the Caleb clan can be discerned\nfrom the lists in this chapter, verses 18\u201224, 42\u201250. It appears that at\nfirst their seats were in the southern parts of Judah\u2015\u2015witness verses\n42\u201249, in which several of the names, viz. Ziph (Joshua xv. 24 or 25),\nMareshah (2 Chronicles xi. 8), Hebron, Tappuah (Joshua xv. 34), Maon\n(Joshua xv. 55), and Beth-zur (Joshua xv. 58) are names of towns in the\nsouth or south-west of Judah. From these, their pre-exilic homes, they\nwere driven northwards, and during the exilic period and afterwards\nthey occupied many of the townships not far from Jerusalem, e.g.\nBethlehem (see verses 50\u201255). Apart from the names in verses 50\u201255,\nwe have a testimony to this northward movement in verse 24 (where\nsee note), and probably also in verse 18, where the names _Jerioth_\n(_tents_) and _Azubah_ (_forsaken_) hint at the abandonment first of\nnomadic life and then of the south Judean settlements. This movement\nwas largely no doubt compulsory, under pressure from the Edomites to\nthe south (compare above i. 43, note) who in their turn were being\nforced north by a strong and fairly constant encroachment of Arab\ntribes (see Wellhausen, _De Gentibus_, and more recently H\u00f6lscher,\n_Pal\u00e4stina_, pp. 22, 30, on the importance of such evidence as this\nnotice in Chronicles for determining the composition and conditions of\nPalestine in the post-exilic period).\n\n_Mesha_] The Moabite king whose deeds are recorded on the Moabite Stone\nbore this name. LXX. reads _Mareshah_ (\u039c\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03ac) as in the latter part\nof the verse.\n\n \u2074\u2075And the son of Shammai was Maon; and Maon was the father of\n Beth-zur. \u2074\u2076And Ephah, Caleb\u2019s concubine, bare Haran, and Moza,\n and Gazez: and Haran begat Gazez. \u2074\u2077And the sons of Jahdai;\n Regem, and Jotham, and Geshan, and Pelet, and Ephah, and Shaaph.\n \u2074\u2078Maacah, Caleb\u2019s concubine, bare Sheber and Tirhanah.\n\n=45.= _Maon_] Nabal who was a Calebite lived at the town of Maon\n(1 Samuel xxv. 2, 3). It is improbable that _Maon_ was ever used as\nthe name of a person; compare Buchanan Gray, _Hebrew Proper Names_,\npp. 127 f. See note on verse 42.\n\n \u2074\u2079She bare also Shaaph the father of Madmannah, Sheva the father\n of Machbena, and the father of Gibea; and the daughter of Caleb\n was Achsah.\n\n=49.= _the daughter of Caleb was Achsah_] Compare Judges i. 12.\n\n=50\u201255.= These verses give the post-exilic settlements of the Calebites\nin the townships of northern Judea, not far from Jerusalem: see verse\n42, note.\n\n \u2075\u2070These were the sons of Caleb; the son\u00b9 of Hur, the firstborn\n of Ephrathah, Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim; \u2075\u00b9Salma the\n father of Beth-lehem, Hareph the father of Beth-gader.\n\n \u00b9 The Septuagint has, _sons_.\n\n=50.= _the son of Hur_] Read with the LXX., =the sons of Hur=. Hur was\nthe son of Caleb (verse 19).\n\n_the firstborn of Ephrathah_] see note verse 24.\n\n \u2075\u00b2And Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim had sons; Haroeh, half\n of the Menuhoth.\n\n=52.= _Haroeh, half of the Menuhoth_] The Hebrew is quite obscure, but\nmay perhaps be rendered, =who provided for half the resting-places=,\nthe description applying to Shobal, i.e. his work was to supervise\nsome of the halting stations of the caravans which passed through\nthe territory of Judah. Compare similar details in iv. 21\u201223, and the\ntitle _Prince of the resting-places_ (margin _quarter-master_) given to\nSeraiah in Jeremiah li. 59. Almost certainly, however, the text in the\npresent passage is corrupt, and, following iv. 2 and verse 54, we may\nread =Reaiah and half of the Manahathites=. For the latter see below,\nverse 54.\n\n \u2075\u00b3And the families of Kiriath-jearim; the Ithrites, and the\n Puthites, and the Shumathites, and the Mishraites; of them came\n the Zorathites and the Eshtaolites.\n\n=53.= _Zorathites, Eshtaolites_] for Zorah (_modern_ Surah) and Eshtaol\n(_modern_ Eshua), compare Judges xiii. 25.\n\n \u2075\u2074The sons of Salma; Beth-lehem, and the Netophathites,\n Atrothbeth-Joab, and half of the Manahathites, the Zorites.\n\n=54.= _Manahathites, the Zorites_] The Manahathites of Zorah must\nbe associated with _Manoah_, the father of Samson, according to the\ntradition of Judges xiii. 2, 25, and an inhabitant of Zorah (see Cooke,\n_Judges_, pp. 131, 138, in this series).\n\n \u2075\u2075And the families of scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the\n Tirathites, the Shimeathites, the Sucathites. These are the\n Kenites that came of Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.\n\n=55.= _families of scribes_] an indication of post-exilic date.\n\n_the Kenites that came of Hammath_] or perhaps, =the Kenites who came\nin= (i.e. who attached themselves to Israel), =who were from Hammath=.\n\n_father of the house of Rechab_] The verse is somewhat obscure, but it\nis most probable that the Chronicler preserves a correct tradition in\nthe connection here alleged between the Rechabites and the Kenites. On\nthe ancient zeal for Jehovah displayed by the Rechabites, see 2 Kings\nx. 15 ff.; and for their distinctive standpoint, Jeremiah xxxv.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n\n\n =1\u201224.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 2 Samuel iii. 2\u20125).\n THE SONS BORN TO DAVID IN HEBRON.\n\n \u00b9Now these were the sons of David, which were born unto him in\n Hebron: the firstborn, Amnon, of Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the\n second, Daniel, of Abigail the Carmelitess;\n\n=1.= _Daniel_] LXX. (B) \u0394\u03b1\u03bc\u03bd\u03b9\u03ae\u03bb, (A) \u0394\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b9\u03ac. In 2 Samuel iii. 3\n_Chileab_, but LXX. \u0394\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b9\u03ac. The real name of David\u2019s second son\nremains therefore uncertain.\n\n \u00b2the third, Absalom the son of Maacah the daughter of Talmai\n king of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith;\n\n=2.= _Geshur_] Compare ii. 23, note.\n\n \u00b3the fifth, Shephatiah of Abital; the sixth, Ithream by Eglah\n his wife. \u2074Six were born unto him in Hebron; and there he\n reigned seven years and six months: and in Jerusalem he reigned\n thirty and three years.\n\n=3.= _Eglah his wife_] In 2 Samuel iii. 5 \u201cEglah David\u2019s wife,\u201d where\nhowever _David_ is probably a wrong reading for the name of a previous\nhusband of Eglah.\n\n\n =5\u20129= (= chapter xiv. 4\u20127 and 2 Samuel v. 14\u201216).\n THE SONS BORN TO DAVID IN JERUSALEM.\n\n \u2075And these were born unto him in Jerusalem: Shimea, and Shobab,\n and Nathan, and Solomon, four, of Bath-shua the daughter of\n Ammiel:\n\n=5.= _Shimea_] in xiv. 4 and 2 Samuel v. 14 (Revised Version) _Shammua_.\n\n_Nathan_] Through him our Lord\u2019s descent is traced in Luke iii. 31.\n\n_Solomon_] Only here are other sons besides Solomon attributed to\nBath-sheba.\n\n_Bath-shua_] is a slight variation in pronunciation of Bath-sheba.\n\n_the daughter of Ammiel_] of _Eliam_ (perhaps a by-form of _Ammiel_)\nin 2 Samuel xi. 3. An Eliam son of Ahithophel, David\u2019s counsellor, is\nmentioned in 2 Samuel xxiii. 34; Bath-sheba may therefore have been\ngrand-daughter to Ahithophel. Notice that the Chronicler does not\ncall Bath-sheba _the wife of Uriah the Hittite_; he nowhere refers to\nDavid\u2019s great sin; compare xx. 1\u20123, where the silence of Chronicles on\nthis matter is specially to be noted.\n\n \u2076and Ibhar, and Elishama, and Eliphelet; \u2077and Nogah, and Nepheg,\n and Japhia;\n\n=6.= _Elishama_] in xiv. 5 and 2 Samuel v. 15 _Elishua_, no doubt the\nright reading, for otherwise (compare verse 8) we have two sons of\nDavid named _Elishama_.\n\n_Eliphelet_] in xiv. 5 _Elpelet_. _Eliphelet_ cannot be right, for it\noccurs again as the name of the thirteenth son in verse 8. _Elpelet_\nmay be right here and _Eliphelet_ in verse 8, for according to Hebrew\ncustom two brothers might bear names of similar sound and significance.\nBut both Eliphelet and Nogah, the following word, are lacking in 2\nSamuel v. 15; and are probably only textual errors due to dittography.\n\n \u2078and Elishama, and Eliada, and Eliphelet, nine. \u2079All these were\n the sons of David, beside the sons of the concubines; and Tamar\n was their sister.\n\n=8.= _Eliada_] so in 2 Samuel v. 16, but in 1 Chronicles xiv. 7\n_Beeliada_ (i.e. Baaliada, \u201cThe Lord\u2015\u2015the Baal\u2015\u2015knows\u201d). This seems\nto have been changed to _Eliada_ (i.e. God knows), when the title\n_Baal_ had come to have only heathen associations, and was accordingly\nrepudiated by the Jews: see the note on viii. 33.\n\n\n =10\u201216.=\n THE LINE OF DAVIDIC KINGS.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Solomon\u2019s son was Rehoboam, Abijah his son, Asa his son,\n Jehoshaphat his son; \u00b9\u00b9Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his\n son;\n\nTwo things are to be noted in this list: (1) Johanan\u2019s name is given in\nverse 15, though he was never king, (2) Zedekiah\u2019s name appears to be\n_twice_ given, once among the sons of Josiah (verse 15) and again in\nhis place according to the succession (verse 16).\n\n=10.= _Abijah_] called _Abijam_ in 1 Kings xiv. 31, xv. 1 ff. _Abia_ is\nthe Greek form of the name; Matthew i. 7 (Authorized Version).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Amaziah his son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son; \u00b9\u00b3Ahaz his\n son, Hezekiah his son, Manasseh his son; \u00b9\u2074Amon his son, Josiah\n his son.\n\n=12.= _Azariah_] This king is usually called _Uzziah_, compare Isaiah\nvi. 1; see note on 2 Chronicles xxvi. 1.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the sons of Josiah; the firstborn Johanan, the second\n Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.\n\n=15.= _the firstborn Johanan_] This son of Josiah never came to the\nthrone, nor is anything known of him except from this passage.\n\n_Zedekiah_] Though reckoned third here, he was younger than Shallum\n(= _Jehoahaz_); compare 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 2 (= 2 Kings xxiii. 31)\nwith 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 11 (= 2 Kings xxiv. 18).\n\n_Shallum_] To be identified with _Jehoahaz_; compare 2 Chronicles\nxxxvi. 1 with Jeremiah xxii. 11.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son.\n\n=16.= _Jeconiah_] This name is sometimes shortened to _Coniah_\n(Jeremiah xxii. 24) and written (with a slight change of meaning)\n_Jehoiachin_ (2 Chronicles xxxvi. 8, 9; 2 Kings xxiv. 6 ff.).\n\n_Zedekiah his son_] Zedekiah was heir, not son, to Jeconiah, whom he\nsucceeded in the kingdom. His relationship to Jeconiah was that of\nuncle.\n\n\n =17\u201219a.=\n THE DAVIDIC LINE FROM JECONIAH TO ZERUBBABEL.\n\nNote that whereas Zerubbabel is here represented apparently as the son\nof Pedaiah and consequently _nephew of Shealtiel_ (= _Salathiel_), he\nis elsewhere called the _son of Shealtiel_ (Ezra iii. 2; Haggai i. 1,\nii. 2; compare Luke iii. 27\u201231). The LXX. solves the difficulty by\nreading _Salathiel_ (= _Shealtiel_) in verse 19. The view that the\nnames given in verse 18 (including _Pedaiah_) are the names of the sons\nof Shealtiel is not probable. Another suggestion is that Zerubbabel was\n_grand_-son both to Shealtiel and Pedaiah, according to such a scheme\nas the following:\n\n Pedaiah Shealtiel\n | |\n a daughter = a son\n |\n Zerubbabel.\n\nA minor difficulty that Shealtiel (= Salathiel) is here connected\nwith David through Solomon, whereas in Luke iii. 27\u201231 his descent\nis traced through Solomon\u2019s brother Nathan, could be explained by an\nintermarriage at some point in the genealogy between the two Davidic\nfamilies.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And the sons of Jeconiah, the captive\u00b9; Shealtiel his son,\n \u00b9\u2078and Malchiram, and Pedaiah, and Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama,\n and Nedabiah.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Assir_.\n\n=17.= _the sons of Jeconiah_] That Jeconiah had sons is not at variance\nwith Jeremiah\u2019s denunciation of him (Jeremiah xxii. 30). That passage\ngives the answer to Jeconiah\u2019s expectation of a speedy return to his\nkingdom (Jeremiah xxii. verse 27); Jeremiah says that neither he nor\nany of his seed shall recover the lost throne: \u201cReckon him childless,\nfor no son of his shall succeed him on his throne.\u201d\n\n_the captive_] Hebrew _assir_, which the Revised Version margin\n(= Authorized Version), following the ancient Versions, has wrongly\ntaken to be a proper name. The Revised Version margin is here only a\nsurvival of Authorized Version. The rendering of the text (_the captive_)\nno doubt expresses the real judgment of the Revisers.\n\n_Shealtiel_] the Greek form _Salathiel_ (Authorized Version) occurs in\nLuke iii. 27 (Authorized Version).\n\n \u00b9\u2079And the sons of Pedaiah; Zerubbabel, and Shimei: and the sons\u00b9\n of Zerubbabel;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _son_.\n\n=19.= _the sons of Zerubbabel_] so the LXX. The Hebrew has =son=, as\nRevised Version margin.\n\n\n =19b\u201224.=\n THE DAVIDIC LINE FROM ZERUBBABEL.\n\nThe text of these verses is very uncertain. In verse 20 the names of\nfive sons are given, but their father\u2019s name (perhaps _Meshullam_) is\nwanting. In verses 21, 22 the LXX. differs from the Hebrew in such a\nway as to affect the number of steps in the genealogy; the Hebrew seems\nto reckon but _one_ generation between Hananiah and Shemaiah, the LXX.\non the contrary reckons _six_; the result on the whole genealogy being\nthat the LXX. counts _eleven_ generations after Zerubbabel as against\n_six_ in the Hebrew In verse 22 again the sons of Shemaiah are reckoned\nto be six, but only _five_ names are given in both Hebrew and LXX.\nFor the bearing of these verses upon the date of Chronicles, see the\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a03.\n\n Meshullam, and Hananiah; and Shelomith was their sister: \u00b2\u2070and\n Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed,\n five.\n\n=20.= _and Hashubah_] Perhaps we should read \u201cThe sons of Meshullam:\nHashubah.\u201d See above.\n\n_Jushab-hesed_] The name means \u201cMercy is restored.\u201d Many such\nsignificant names are found in the present list, and, in general, are\ncharacteristic of the exilic and later periods.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And the sons\u00b9 of Hananiah; Pelatiah, and Jeshaiah: the sons\n of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, the sons of Obadiah, the sons of\n Shecaniah. \u00b2\u00b2And the sons of Shecaniah; Shemaiah: and the sons\n of Shemaiah; Hattush, and Igal, and Bariah, and Neariah, and\n Shaphat, six.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _son_.\n\n=21.= _and Jeshaiah ... Shecaniah_] The LXX. reads (with some blunders\nin reproducing the names), \u201cand Jeshaiah his son, Rephaiah his son,\nArnan his son, Obadiah his son, Shecaniah his son,\u201d thus adding five\nsteps to the genealogy. The difference of reading in the Hebrew text\nthus suggested is very slight. It is quite uncertain whether the Hebrew\nor the reading of the LXX. is to be preferred: see the Introduction\n\u00a7\u00a03, A\u00a02.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And the sons\u00b9 of Neariah; Elioenai, and Hizkiah, and Azrikam,\n three. \u00b2\u2074And the sons of Elioenai; Hodaviah, and Eliashib, and\n Pelaiah, and Akkub, and Johanan, and Delaiah, and Anani, seven.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _son_.\n\n=23.= _Elioenai_] A name meaning, \u201cMine eyes are towards Jehovah,\u201d\ncompare Psalms xxv. 15; compare _Jushab-hesed_ (verse 20) and\n_Hodaviah_ (\u201cGive thanks to Jehovah\u201d = Hoduiah), verse 24.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n\n\n =1\u201223= (compare ii. 3 ff.)\n GENEALOGIES OF THE TRIBES OF JUDAH.\n\nThe material contained in these verses gives rise to no little\nperplexity, not only in itself but also when considered along with the\ngenealogies of Judah in ii. 3 ff. Whether the Chronicler himself could\nhave thrown any light on the points which puzzle us may well be doubted:\nhe was more concerned to preserve all available genealogical matter\nthan to consider or attempt to reconcile conflicting elements. Both the\ndate and relationship of these notices must be confessed to be as yet\nuncertain, opinion being divided even on the question whether the list\nrepresents pre-exilic or post-exilic conditions. Remark that the list\nis essentially a Calebite one.\n\n \u00b9The sons of Judah; Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and\n Shobal.\n\n=1.= As Hezron was the son of Perez (chapter ii. 5) and (if the LXX. be\nright) Shobal was the son of Hur (ii. 50, note), we have in this verse\nfive, if not six, generations.\n\n_Carmi_] for the name, compare ii. 7, and v. 3. Here, however, Carmi\nis certainly an error for =Caleb=: see ii. 4, 5, 9, 50 and also\nthe structure of the present chapter. Thus in accord with the usual\npractice of the Chronicler the chief ancestors are first named (verse\n1), and then, in _reverse_ order, their descendants\u2015\u2015sons of Shobal and\nHur (verses 2\u201210), and sons of Chelub (= Caleb) (verses 11\u201215).\n\n \u00b2And Reaiah the son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat\n Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites.\n\n=2.= _Reaiah_] Compare note on ii. 52.\n\n_the Zorathites_] Compare note on ii. 53.\n\n \u00b3And these were _the sons of_ the father of Etam; Jezreel, and\n Ishma, and Idbash: and the name of their sister was Hazzelelponi:\n\n=3.= _these were_ the sons of _the father of Etam_] The Hebrew has not\ngot the words _the sons of_, and is certainly corrupt. The LXX. reads,\n_These were the sons of Etam._ Correction is difficult, largely owing\nto the obscurity of Etam. If Etam had been named as a son of Shobal in\nverse 2, we might follow the LXX. It is perhaps best to suppose that\nEtam begins the list of descendants of Hur, and to read \u201cthese were\n=the sons of Hur= the father of Etam.\u201d Etam was a place, but whether\nnear Bethlehem (the _Etam_ of 2 Chronicles xi. 6) or in southern Judah\n(the Simeonite _Etam_ of verse 32) is uncertain.\n\n \u2074and Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah.\n These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the\n father of Beth-lehem.\n\n=4.= _Hur_] the first born of Ephrathah (= Ephrath) one of the wives\nof Caleb (ii. 19). Hur was _father of Bethlehem_ through his son Salma\n(ii. 50, 51, LXX.). For the name of the city compare Genesis xxxv. 19\n(_Ephrath the same is Bethlehem_) and Micah v. 2 (Revised Version _Thou,\nBethlehem Ephrathah_).\n\n \u2075And Ashhur the father of Tekoa had two wives, Helah and Naarah.\n \u2076And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and\n Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. \u2077And the sons of\n Helah were Zereth, Izhar\u00b9, and Ethnan.\n\n \u00b9 Another reading is, _and Zohar_.\n\n=5.= _Ashhur the father of Tekoa_] Ashhur is probably only a variant of\nHur (see note ii. 24). Hur then is the exilic or post-exilic \u201cfather\u201d\n(founder) of the Calebite population of Tekoa (5 miles from Bethlehem),\nand of Bethlehem, etc., through his sons (ii. 50\u201252).\n\n_Helah and Naarah_] Neither the names of the wives nor those of the\nchildren yield any certain information.\n\n \u2078And Hakkoz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel\n the son of Harum.\n\n=8.= _And Hakkoz_] But Hebrew =Koz=. The absence of connection with the\npreceding verse is striking. Perhaps Koz was properly one of the sons\nof Helah (verse 7), and a motive for the severance of his name may be\nfound in the wish to make less obvious his Calebite (i.e. non-Levitical)\norigin, in case he were identified with the priestly Hakkoz of xxiv. 10;\nEzekiel ii. 61, a family who were unable to prove an untainted pedigree.\n\n \u2079And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren: and his mother\n called his name Jabez, saying. Because I bare him with sorrow.\n\n=9.= The connection of this verse also does not appear. According to\nTargum (on verse 13) _Jabez_ = _Othniel_, the nephew or brother of\nCaleb.\n\n_And Jabez_, etc.] Render, =And Jabez came to be honoured above his\nbrethren, but his mother had called his name Jabez, saying, Because\nI bare him with pain.= _Jabez_ suggests a somewhat similar word spelt\nwith the same consonants but in a different order, and meaning \u201che\ngiveth pain.\u201d The stylistic similarity between this verse and many\npassages in Genesis (e.g. Genesis xxx.) cannot fail to be noticed, and\nit is important to observe that a tradition of this popular character\nwas current in the style of the patriarchal narratives of Genesis\nin the Chronicler\u2019s time. Compare also vii. 23. The man with the\nill-omened name staved off ill-fortune by his prayer which is given in\nthe following verse.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou\n wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my border, and that thine\n hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil,\n that it be not to my sorrow! And God granted him that which he\n requested.\n\n=10.= _that thou wouldest keep me from evil_] Literally _that thou\nwouldest make ... from evil_. The Hebrew is therefore strange, though\nnot indefensible. Perhaps some words have fallen out, and it may\noriginally have read somewhat as follows, that _thou wouldest make_\n[_room_ (mer\u1e25\u0101bh) _for me, and wouldest redeem_ (ph\u0101d\u012bth\u0101) _me_] _from\nevil_.\n\n_that it be not to my sorrow_] or =so that no pain befell me=.\n\n\n =11\u201215= for _Chelub_ (verse 11) = Caleb (see on ii. 9, 42)\n SONS OF CALEB.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And Chelub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir, which was the\n father of Eshton. \u00b9\u00b2And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and\n Tehinnah the father of Ir-nahash\u00b9. These are the men of Recah.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the city of Nahash_.\n\n=12.= _These are the men of Recah_] Recah is unknown. Perhaps the true\nreading is that of the LXX. (B), _the men of Rechab_, i.e. Rechabite\nfamilies; compare ii. 55, note.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And the sons of Kenaz; Othniel, and Seraiah: and the sons of\n Othniel; Hathath.\n\n=13.= _Othniel_] Eponym of a Kenizzite clan, closely connected with the\nCalebites. Compare note on i. 36, and Judges i. 13 and iii. 9\u201211.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And Meonothai begat Ophrah: and Seraiah begat Joab the father\n of Ge-harashim\u00b9; for they were craftsmen.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the valley of craftsmen_.\n\n=14.= _Meonothai_] perhaps a son of Othniel.\n\n_Ge-harashim_] or, as margin, =the valley of craftsmen=. It is\nmentioned Nehemiah xi. 35 along with _Lod_ (the _Lydda_ of Acts ix. 32)\nand therefore was probably near Lydda.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh; Iru, Elah, and\n Naam: and the sons of Elah; and Kenaz.\n\n=15.= _Caleb the son of Jephunneh_] Compare ii. 42, note.\n\n_the sons of Elah; and Kenaz_] The _sons of Elah_ and _Kenaz_ seem to\nbe co-ordinated, as each represented a family descended from Caleb; but\nperhaps the text is faulty.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And the sons of Jehallelel; Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and\n Asarel.\n\n=16\u201220.= The connection of these names with Judah does not appear. In\naccordance with the structure of this section (see note on Carmi, verse\n1) we might expect here to find \u201cthe sons of Hezron or Perez\u201d; and,\nsince the relationship between Jehallelel (16) and Ezrah (17) is not\nindicated, it has been suggested that we should insert in verse 16 \u201cAnd\nthe sons of Perez and Jehallelel and Ezrah.\u201d No certainty can be felt\nin the matter.\n\n_Ziph_] in south Judah, 1 Samuel xxiii. 15. Ziphah, a feminine form of\nthe same name.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And the sons of Ezrah; Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon:\n and she bare Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah the father of\n Eshtemoa.\n\n=17.= _and Jalon: and she bare Miriam_] As the text stands _she_ has\nno antecedent. It has therefore been proposed to transfer from verse 18\nthe words _And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh,\nwhich Mered took_, and put them after _Jalon_. Bithiah then appears as\nthe mother of _Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah_, and the difficulty of the\nabsence of her sons\u2019 names from verse 18 disappears. For _father of\nEshtemoa_ see ii. 24 note, and for _Eshtemoa_ see Joshua xxi. 14.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And his wife the Jewess\u00b9 bare Jered the father of Gedor, and\n Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah.\n And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, which\n Mered took.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Hajehudijah_.\n\n=18.= _his wife_] the wife of Mered, if the transposition mentioned in\nthe last note be accepted.\n\n_his wife the Jewess_] so called in contrast to his Egyptian wife.\n\n_Gedor_] compare verse 4, where a different person is perhaps by a\ndifferent tradition called father of Gedor. _Gedor_ is to be identified\nwith the ruins of Jedur on the road between Jerusalem and Hebron,\ncompare verse 39.\n\n_Soco ... Zanoah_] The Soco (Joshua xv. 48) and Zanoah (Joshua xv. 56)\nhere mentioned were situated to the south-west of Hebron. They are to\nbe distinguished from a Soco near the valley of Elah (Joshua xv. 35,\n2 Chronicles xi. 7, xxviii. 18) and Zanoah near Beth-shemesh (Joshua\nxv. 34).\n\n_these are the sons of Bithiah_] See note on verse 17. A \u201cdaughter of\nPharaoh\u201d is somewhat strange in such surroundings. For an interesting\nemendation and interpretation, see Macalister, _Palestine Exploration\nFund, Quarterly Statement_, 1905, p. 252.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were\n the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maacathite.\n \u00b2\u2070And the sons of Shimon; Amnon, and Rinnah, Ben-hanan, and\n Tilon. And the sons of Ishi; Zoheth, and Ben-zoheth.\n\n=19.= _Keilah_] a town of the Shephelah (Joshua xv. 44), the scene of\none of David\u2019s exploits (1 Samuel xxiii. 1\u20125).\n\n_Eshtemoa the Maacathite_] The epithet distinguishes this Eshtemoa from\nthat of verse 17. _The Maacathite_ may mean the descendant of Maacah\n(ii. 48), the concubine of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel.\n\n=21\u201223.= These verses purport to give some fragmentary information\nof the descendants of _Shelah_. It must be owned that they are most\nobscure, and much more difficult than they appear at first. In the\n_Palestine Exploration Fund Statement_, 1905, pp. 243 ff., 328 ff.,\nR.\u00a0A.\u00a0S. Macalister gives a highly ingenious reinterpretation of\nthis passage in the light of certain jar handles inscribed with names\nsimilar to those mentioned here and in certain other passages of the\nChronicler\u2019s genealogies; and conjectures that throughout the chapter\nwe have a (mutilated) genealogy of a family of craftsmen, tracing\ndescent from two individuals, a Jerahmeel and a Caleb. In a text so\nobscure it is no objection that the theory involves several textual\nemendations, and is too intricate for further treatment here. It is\nrejected by Driver, _Modern Research_, p. 77.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9The sons of Shelah the son of Judah; Er the father of Lecah,\n and Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the families of the house\n of them that wrought fine linen, of the house of Ashbea;\n\n=21.= _Shelah_] mentioned in ii. 3 as a son of Judah. As there is\nno reference to him in iv. 1, perhaps these difficult verses are an\naddition. For other references to his descendants, see ix. 5, Nehemiah\nxi. 5.\n\n_Mareshah_] ii. 42; 2 Chronicles xi. 8; Joshua xv. 44 (mentioned with\nKeilah). A town in the south of Judah.\n\n_the house of Ashbea_] Nothing is known of such a family. Render\nperhaps _Beth-Ashbea_, but the place is otherwise unknown.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who\n had dominion in Moab, and Jashubi-lehem. And the records\u00b9 are\n ancient.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _words_.\n\n=22.= _and Joash, and Saraph, who_, etc.] We find no other trace of\nthese two as rulers of Moab. The Targum fancifully identified them with\nMahlon and Chilion of Ruth i. 2, 4. For a conjecture as to the cause of\ntheir presence in Moab, see Macalister, _Palestine Exploration Fund,\nQuarterly Statement_, 1905, p. 340.\n\n_and Jashubi-lehem_] render, with _Vulgate_, =who returned to\nBethlehem=, a translation which requires only an easy emendation of the\npresent Hebrew text.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3These were the potters, and the inhabitants\u00b9 of Netaim and\n Gederah: there they dwelt with the king for his work.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _those that dwelt among plantations and hedges_.\n\n=23.= _there they dwelt with the king for his work_] In the days of the\nkingdom the families were clients of the king and did his work; compare\n1 Kings vii. 46. The simplicity of this statement seems to have been\na stumbling-block to the early translators who paraphrase; LXX., _They\nwere strong in his kingdom and dwelt there_; Targum, _They made their\ndwelling there with the Shekinah of the King of the World for the\npractice of the Law._\n\n\n =24\u201227.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF SIMEON.\n\n \u00b2\u2074The sons of Simeon; Nemuel\u00b9, and Jamin, Jarib\u00b2, Zerah\u00b3,\n Shaul: \u00b2\u2075Shallum his son, Mibsam his son, Mishma his son. \u00b2\u2076And\n the sons of Mishma; Hammuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimei his\n son. \u00b2\u2077And Shimei had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his\n brethren had not many children, neither did all their family\n multiply, like to the children of Judah.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xlvi. 10, Exodus vi. 15, _Jemuel_.\n\n \u00b2 In Genesis xlvi. 10, _Jachin_.\n\n \u00b3 Genesis xlvi. 10, _Zohar_.\n\n=24\u201227.= _The sons of Simeon_] With unimportant variations in the\nnames, the five sons of Simeon are mentioned also in Genesis xlvi. 10,\nExodus vi. 15, and Numbers xxvi. 12, 13. A sixth son, Ohad, is given\nby the list in Genesis. As the mother of one, Shaul, was a Canaanitess\n(Genesis xlvi. 10) and Mibsam and Mishma are also reckoned Ishmaelites\n(i. 29, 30), the tribe of Simeon contained marked non-Israelite\nelements. This is the more natural by reason of its location in the\nextreme south of Palestine.\n\n=27.= _six daughters_] LXX. _three daughters_.\n\n\n =28\u201233= (= Joshua xix. 2\u20128).\n THE TERRITORY OF SIMEON.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And they dwelt at Beer-sheba, and Moladah, and Hazar-shual;\n\n=28.= _Beer-sheba_] at the southern extremity of Palestine, as Dan was\nat the northern (1 Samuel iii. 20).\n\n \u00b2\u2079and at Bilhah, and at Ezem, and at Tolad;\n\n=29.= _Tolad_] In Joshua xix. 4 _Eltolad_.\n\n \u00b3\u2070and at Bethuel, and at Hormah, and at Ziklag;\n\n=30.= _Bethuel_] compare Genesis xxii. 22. In Joshua xix. 4 _Bethul_.\nIn 1 Samuel xxx. 27 _Bethel_ (not the famous Bethel near Jerusalem).\n\n_Hormah_] Numbers xiv. 45, xxi. 3; Judges i. 17.\n\n_Ziklag_] 1 Samuel xxvii. 6. The site is not certainly identified.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9and at Beth-marcaboth, and Hazar-susim, and at Beth-biri, and\n at Shaaraim. These were their cities unto the reign of David.\n\n=31.= _Beth-marcaboth ... Hazar-susim_] perhaps royal chariot-cities, 1\nKings ix. 19. The names mean _House of chariots_ and _Court of horses_.\n\n_Shaaraim_] 1 Samuel xvii. 52.\n\n_These were their cities unto the reign of David_] either a reference\nto David\u2019s census; or else it is implied that these cities ceased to\nbelong to Simeon after David\u2019s day. The clause breaks the connection of\nverses 31, 32; and is perhaps a late gloss.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And their villages were Etam, and Ain, Rimmon, and Tochen, and\n Ashan, five cities:\n\n=32.= _And their villages were Etam_] more probably =and their villages=\n(end of verse 31). =Etam=, etc. (continuing the list of cities as in\nverse 31). By _villages_ (_\u1e24\u0103\u1e63\u0113r\u012bm_) are meant small hamlets dependent\non larger towns and generally unwalled (Leviticus xxv. 31).\n\n_Ain, Rimmon_] so also in the parallel passage, Joshua xix. 7; but\ncertainly only one place is meant, _Ain-Rimmon_ (see the commentaries\non Joshua xv. 42 and xix. 7). The number of the cities here ought\ntherefore to be reckoned four, not five.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3and all their villages that were round about the same cities,\n unto Baal. These were their habitations, and they have their\n genealogy.\n\n=33.= _unto Baal_] _Baal_ (\u201clord\u201d) standing by itself is an unlikely\nname for a town. Read _Baalath-beer, Ramah of the South_ (\u201cthe mistress\nof the well, the high place of the South\u201d), as in Joshua xix. 8.\n\n\n =34\u201243.=\n THE HEROES OF SIMEON AND THEIR EXPLOITS.\n\nIt seems probable that the exploits mentioned in these verses are\nderived from some old, though obscure, tradition, and are therefore of\nhistorical value for the movements of the tribe of Simeon. Apparently\nwe are to understand that in the time of Hezekiah a band of the wild\nsemi-nomadic tribe of Simeon made a successful raid upon a fertile\nvalley near Gerar (a correction for _Gedor_, see verse 39), a township\non the Philistine border, taking by surprise its peaceful population\nwho were partly Canaanites, partly settlers who had come originally\nfrom a place _Maon_ (see verse 41). _Gedor_, the reading of the Hebrew\ntext, was a town just north of Hebron. A raid by Simeonites on such a\ntown is a startling, but not incredible, episode in Hezekiah\u2019s time;\nbut see also note on verse 40. Finally verses 42, 43 record a further\nassault by Simeonites, this time against Edomite territory. For full\ndiscussion see Hogg in _Encyclopedia Biblia_ iv. 4527 ff.; also\nMacalister, _Palestine Exploration Fund Statement_, 1905, 335 ff.\n\n \u00b3\u2074And Meshobab, and Jamlech, and Joshah the son of Amaziah;\n \u00b3\u2075and Joel, and Jehu the son of Joshibiah, the son of Seraiah,\n the son of Asiel; \u00b3\u2076and Elioenai, and Jaakobah, and Jeshohaiah,\n and Asaiah, and Adiel, and Jesimiel, and Benaiah; \u00b3\u2077and Ziza\n the son of Shiphi, the son of Allon, the son of Jedaiah, the son\n of Shimri, the son of Shemaiah; \u00b3\u2078these mentioned by name were\n princes in their families: and their fathers\u2019 houses increased\n greatly.\n\n=38.= _their fathers\u2019 houses_] See note on chapter v. 13.\n\n \u00b3\u2079And they went to the entering in of Gedor, even unto the east\n side of the valley, to seek pasture for their flocks.\n\n=39.= _the entering in of Gedor_] Compare verse 18. The Gedor of Joshua\nxv. 58 is identified with _Jedur_, _Ijdur_ (north of Hebron, B\u00e4deker,\n_Palestine_\u2075, p. 112). See Macalister, _Palestine Exploration Fund,\nQuarterly Statement_, 1905, 335. LXX. has _Gerar_ (compare Genesis xx.\n1; xxvi. 1), on the Philistine border.\n\n \u2074\u2070And they found fat pasture and good, and the land was wide,\n and quiet, and peaceable; for they that dwelt there aforetime\n were of Ham.\n\n=40.= _they ... of Ham_] i.e. Canaanites, who had long been settled\nin the district (compare the security felt by the people of Laish,\nJudges xviii. 27). Their presence would seem natural in _Gerar_ on the\nPhilistine border but strange in _Gedor_ near Hebron. If therefore the\nreading _Gedor_ be preferred above, there is something to be said for\nthe suggestion of Macalister (p. 335) that we should here read \u201cof\nMenahem\u201d (a change of one letter in Hebrew), some unwarlike Hebrew\nfamily, perhaps potters.\n\n \u2074\u00b9And these written by name came in the days of Hezekiah king\n of Judah, and smote their tents, and the Meunim that were found\n there, and destroyed\u00b9 them utterly, unto this day, and dwelt in\n their stead: because there was pasture there for their flocks.\n \u2074\u00b2And some of them, even of the sons of Simeon, five hundred\n men, went to mount Seir, having for their captains Pelatiah, and\n Neariah, and Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _devoted them_.\n\n=41.= _written by name_] Apparently those mentioned in verses 34\u201237;\nbut the names there are of a late character, and have perhaps been\nartificially connected with the old tradition of the raiders in verses\n41 ff.\n\n_in the days of Hezekiah_] The Hebrew is ambiguous, but the clause\nshould probably be connected with the verb \u201ccame,\u201d not with \u201cwritten\u201d:\nthe raid, not the record, was made in the days of Hezekiah.\n\n_and the Meunim_] Here, and in 2 Chronicles xx. 1 (see note), xxvi.\n7, the LXX. has Minaeans, an Arabian people who from the 8th or 9th\ncentury B.C. or perhaps much earlier exercised great authority in South\nArabia (see _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9 II. 264). The Meunim of _the\npresent_ passage are to be connected with an Edomitic city or tribe\nnot far from Petra, south of the Dead Sea; or (so Macalister, p. 336)\nare simply the people of Maon, a township near Hebron in Judah.\n2 Chronicles xx. 1 (note) and xxvi. 7, Revised Version.\n\n_destroyed them utterly_] or, as margin, =devoted them= (compare Joshua\nvi. 18, 21, Revised Version). See note 2 Chronicles xx. 23.\n\n \u2074\u00b3And they smote the remnant of the Amalekites that escaped, and\n dwelt there, unto this day.\n\n=43.= _the remnant of the Amalekites_] i.e. the descendants of those\nwho had escaped the attacks of Saul and David (1 Samuel xiv. 48, xv.\n3 ff.). They had apparently found refuge in some part of the Edomite\nterritory, for _mount Seir_ is a synonym for _the land of Edom_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n\n\n =1\u201210.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF REUBEN.\n\n \u00b9And the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was\n the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father\u2019s couch,\n his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of\n Israel; and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the\n birthright.\n\n=1.= _he defiled_] Genesis xxxv. 22, xlix. 4.\n\n_his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph_] Compare Genesis\nxlviii. 5, \u201cEphraim and Manasseh, even as Reuben and Simeon, shall\nbe mine,\u201d words of Jacob which might be interpreted to mean that the\nrights of the firstborn were to pass from Reuben and Simeon to Ephraim\nand Manasseh, the sons of Joseph.\n\n_the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright_] i.e. though\nthe birthright of Reuben has been given to Joseph, yet the genealogy\nof Joseph is not to be given before that of Reuben. Verse 2 intimates\nthat, though Joseph possessed the birthright, Judah had a primacy as\nsupplying the royal family. In this confusion of claims the natural\norder is followed and the genealogy of Reuben is given first.\n\n \u00b2For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the\n prince\u00b9; but the birthright was Joseph\u2019s:)\n\n \u00b9 Or, _leader_.\n\n=2.= _Judah prevailed above his brethren_] Compare Genesis xlix. 8\n(Jacob to Judah) \u201cThy father\u2019s children shall bow down before thee.\u201d\n\n_the prince_] The Hebrew word is _n\u0101g\u012bd_. The immediate reference is to\nDavid (Saul being virtually ignored by the Chronicler).\n\n \u00b3the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel; Hanoch, and Pallu,\n Hezron, and Carmi.\n\n=3.= _the sons of Reuben_] The same four names (with one unimportant\nvariation in spelling in Authorized Version) appear Genesis xlvi. 9;\nExodus vi. 14.\n\n_Hanoch_] the correct spelling of the familiar name _Enoch_; compare\ni. 3.\n\n_Hezron, and Carmi_] also given as sons of Judah: for Hezron, compare\nii. 5 (note); for Carmi ii. 7, iv. 1.\n\n \u2074The sons of Joel; Shemaiah his son, Gog his son, Shimei his son;\n \u2075Micah his son, Reaiah his son, Baal his son;\n\n=4.= _sons of Joel_] the connection, if any, with the preceding verse\nis not known.\n\n \u2076Beerah his son, whom Tilgath-pilneser\u00b2 king of Assyria carried\n away captive: he was prince of the Reubenites. \u2077And his brethren\n by their families, when the genealogy of their generations was\n reckoned; the chief, Jeiel, and Zechariah,\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Kings xv. 29, xvi. 7, _Tiglath-pileser_.\n\n=6.= _Beerah ... captive_] The deportation of Beerah is recorded only\nhere, but there is no reason why the tradition should not be historical.\nThe information is of very slight importance in itself, but since there\nis absolutely no motive to make the Chronicler invent the statement,\nthis is precisely the _kind_ of notice which implies that he had\nsome sources oral or traditional at his command outside the canonical\nmaterial (see Introduction. \u00a7\u00a05).\n\n_Tilgath-pilneser_] called _Tiglath-pileser_ (2 Kings xv. 29), and no\ndoubt identical with _Pul_ (see below, verse 26).\n\n \u2078and Bela the son of Azaz, the son of Shema, the son of Joel,\n who dwelt in Aroer, even unto Nebo and Baal-meon: \u2079and eastward\n he dwelt even unto the entering in of the wilderness from the\n river Euphrates: because their cattle were multiplied in the\n land of Gilead.\n\n=8.= _Aroer_] now _\u2018Ar\u2018\u0101ir_, a heap of ruins near the _w\u0101dy Mojib_, i.e.\nthe _Arnon_ (Joshua xii. 2). According to Joshua xiii. 9\u201216 it passed\nfrom Sihon king of the Amorites into the hands of the Reubenites. See\nB\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 153.\n\n_Nebo and Baal-meon_] A line drawn due north from Aroer (see last note)\npasses close first to _Ma\u2018in_ (which may be _Baal-meon_) and then to\n_Jebel Neb\u0101_, which evidently preserves the name of Mount Nebo.\n\n_Baal-meon_] called more correctly Beth-baal-meon Joshua xiii. 17.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And in the days of Saul they made war with the Hagrites, who\n fell by their hand: and they dwelt in their tents throughout all\n the _land_ east of Gilead.\n\n=10.= _in the days of Saul_] Saul\u2019s victory over the Ammonites (1\nSamuel xi.) may have paved the way for the expansion of Israel east of\nJordan, but see also the note on verse 19.\n\n_the Hagrites_] compare Psalms lxxxiii. 6 (Revised Version margin).\nThey were an Arab people. See further the note on verse 19.\n\n_the_ land _east of Gilead_] i.e. the land between Gilead and the\nEuphrates (compare verse 9). On Gilead, see note, ii. 22.\n\n\n =11\u201217.=\n THE GENEALOGY AND SETTLEMENTS OF GAD.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And the sons of Gad dwelt over against them, in the land of\n Bashan unto Salecah:\n\n=11.= _Bashan_] the wide district extending from the Jabbok on the\nsouth to Hermon in the north and from the Sea of Galilee on the west to\nthe mountains of Hauran on the east (compare verse 23). Remark that in\nNumbers xxxii. 33; Deuteronomy iii. 12; Joshua xiii. 25, Gad is located\nin Gilead (south of Bashan) where the Chronicler has placed Reuben.\n\n_Salecah_] is probably represented at the present day by the ruins of\n_Salkhad_ due south of the _Jebel Hauran_ and almost due east of Bo\u1e63ra.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Joel the chief, and Shapham the second, and Janai, and Shaphat\n in Bashan: \u00b9\u00b3and their brethren of their fathers\u2019 houses;\n Michael, and Meshullam, and Sheba, and Jorai, and Jacan, and\n Zia, and Eber, seven. \u00b9\u2074These were the sons of Abihail the son of\n Huri, the son of Jaroah, the son of Gilead, the son of Michael,\n the son of Jeshishai, the son of Jahdo, the son of Buz; \u00b9\u2075Ahi\n the son of Abdiel, the son of Guni, chief of their fathers\u2019\n houses.\n\n=12.= _and Janai, and Shaphat_] LXX. \u201cJanin the scribe\u201d; Targum, \u201cJanai\nthe judge.\u201d\n\n_of their fathers\u2019 houses_] This rather awkward phrase means clans\nor patriarchal families (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03af). Sometimes it is used to denote the\nwhole tribe, compare Numbers xvii. 17.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And they dwelt in Gilead in Bashan, and in her towns\u00b9, and in\n all the suburbs\u00b2 of Sharon, as far as their borders\u00b3.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _daughters_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _pasture lands_\n\n \u00b3 Hebrew _goings forth_.\n\n=16.= _in Gilead in Bashan_] a contradictory phrase, since _Gilead_\nmeans the southern and _Bashan_ the northern part of Israel\u2019s\ntrans-Jordanic territory. Perhaps _in Bashan_ is here an addition\nmade by the Chronicler or a later hand to harmonise _in Gilead_\n(the territory usually assigned to Gad\u2015\u2015see note on verse 11 above)\nwith verses 11 and 23. The emendation \u201cin Gilead in Jabesh\u201d has been\nsuggested.\n\n_Sharon_] some place, unidentified, to the east of Jordan. LXX. (B) has\n_Sirion_. (The well-known _Sharon_ lay in the maritime plain between\nJoppa and Caesarea.)\n\n \u00b9\u2077All these were reckoned by genealogies in the days of Jotham\n king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam king of Israel.\n\n=17.= _reckoned by genealogies ... and in the days of Jeroboam_]\n\u201cReckoning by genealogy\u201d is a phrase used only in the writings of the\nChronicler (Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah), but the practice probably\nresembled what is called in other books \u201cnumbering the people\u201d: see\nthe example in Nehemiah vii. 5\u201265. The object however was different and\ncorresponded with the circumstances of the returned exiles, who found\nthemselves in the midst of a Gentile population in Judea. The people\nwere \u201creckoned by genealogy\u201d not so much to take a census of them,\nas to inquire into the purity of their Israelite descent. The ancient\nterm \u201cnumbering\u201d would be a more suitable description of a transaction\nbelonging to the days of Jotham. For _Jotham_ see 2 Chronicles xxvii.\nand for _Jeroboam_ 2 Kings xiv. 23\u201229. The last years of the reign of\nJeroboam II probably synchronized with part of the reign of Jotham.\n\n\n =18\u201222.=\n THE WAR OF THE TRANS-JORDANIC TRIBES AGAINST ARABIAN TRIBES.\n\n \u00b9\u2078The sons of Reuben, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of\n Manasseh, of valiant men, men able to bear buckler and sword,\n and to shoot with bow, and skilful in war, were forty and four\n thousand seven hundred and threescore, that were able to go\n forth to war.\n\n=18.= _skilful in war_] compare xii. 8, 21.\n\n_forty and four thousand_] According to Joshua iv. 13 \u201cabout forty\nthousand\u201d from these tribes crossed the Jordan with Joshua.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And they made war with the Hagrites, with Jetur, and Naphish,\n and Nodab.\n\n=19.= _made war with the Hagrites..._] Possibly this war described\nin verses 18\u201222 is only a midrashic variation of the war briefly\nnoted in verse 10; possibly we have traditions of separate conflicts.\nThat fighting against Arabian tribes took place in the time of Saul\n(verse 10) is quite probable, and perhaps there is here a definite\nrecollection of the fact. Yet conflicts on the eastern borders were no\ndoubt frequent, and the ancient fights may have been overlaid with the\nmemories and details of more recent struggles, and especially the names\nassigned may be those of later foes. Though the Hagrites are mentioned\nin inscriptions of Sennacherib, they seem to have grown more prominent\nand powerful in later days (compare Psalms lxxxiii. 7), and their name\nin the Chronicler\u2019s time may have been somewhat loosely and generally\napplied to the Arabian tribes near Palestine.\n\n_Jetur, and Naphish, and Nodab_] Other Bedouin tribes, _Jetur_,\n_Naphish_, _Kedemah_ are given as sons of Ishmael in i. 31.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And they were helped against them, and the Hagrites were\n delivered into their hand, and all that were with them: for\n they cried to God in the battle, and he was intreated of them;\n because they put their trust in him. \u00b2\u00b9And they took away their\n cattle; of their camels fifty thousand, and of sheep two hundred\n and fifty thousand, and of asses two thousand, and of men\u00b9 an\n hundred thousand.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _souls of men_.\n\n=20.= _they were helped_] with Divine assistance; compare xv. 26.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2For there fell many slain, because the war was of God. And\n they dwelt in their stead until the captivity.\n\n=22.= _was of God_] i.e. was prompted by God; compare 1 Samuel xv. 2, 3.\n\n\n =23, 24.=\n THE HALF TRIBE OF MANASSEH.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And the children of the half tribe of Manasseh dwelt in\n the land: they increased from Bashan unto Baal-hermon and\n Senir and mount Hermon. \u00b2\u2074And these were the heads of their\n fathers\u2019 houses; even Epher, and Ishi, and Eliel, and Azriel,\n and Jeremiah, and Hodaviah, and Jahdiel, mighty men of valour,\n famous men, heads of their fathers\u2019 houses.\n\n=23.= For the genealogy of Manasseh, see vii. 14 ff.\n\n_Baal-hermon_] In Judges iii. 3 a mount Baal-hermon is mentioned. Here\nprobably a city is meant, possibly _Banias_, on the eastern slope of\nHermon.\n\n_Senir_] an Amorite name for Mt Hermon or a peak of the range\n(Deuteronomy iii. 9).\n\n\n =25, 26.=\n THE CAPTIVITY OF THE TRANS-JORDANIC TRIBES.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And they trespassed against the God of their fathers, and\n went a whoring after the gods of the peoples of the land, whom\n God destroyed before them.\n\n=25.= _they trespassed_] The Hebrew verb has a special reference\nto unlawful or idolatrous worship and also to the violation of a\nconsecrated thing; compare Joshua xxii. 16, 20, 31.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of\n Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria, and\n he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and\n the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and\n Habor, and Hara, and to the river of Gozan, unto this day.\n\n=26.= _stirred up the spirit_] Compare 2 Chronicles xxi. 16, where see\nnote; xxxvi. 22.\n\n_Pul ... and ... Tilgath-pilneser_] Both here and in 2 Kings xv. 19,\n29 (_Pul ... Tiglath-pileser_) the two names are used as though two\ndifferent persons were meant, but there is no doubt that _Pul_ is the\nearlier and _Tiglath-pileser_ the royal name of the same king; compare\nverse 6.\n\n_unto Halah_, etc.] In 2 Kings xv. 29 it is said only, _to Assyria_; in\n2 Kings xvii. 6 it is said that the _Western_ tribes (\u201cSamaria\u201d) were\ncarried away and placed _in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan\nand in the cities of the Medes_.\n\n_Halah_] probably a district of Mesopotamia, but it has not yet been\nconvincingly identified.\n\n_Habor_] a river flowing into the Euphrates from the east, known to the\nGreeks as \u03a7\u03b1\u03b2\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 or \u1f08\u03b2\u03cc\u03c1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n_and Hara_] No place of this name is known and the word is omitted in\nLXX. The reading may be corrupt for _and in the cities of the Medes_\n(2 Kings xvii. 6, compare LXX.; xviii. 11).\n\n_the river of Gozan_] Gozan was a district of Mesopotamia.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n\n\n =1\u201281= (= v. 27\u2012vi. 66 according to the Hebrew division).\n GENEALOGIES AND SETTLEMENTS OF LEVI.\n\n\n =1\u201215.=\n THE SONS OF LEVI, AND THE HIGH-PRIESTS TO THE CAPTIVITY.\n\nThe identity of interests and standpoint between the Chronicler and\nthe Levitical order has been noted in the Introduction \u00a7\u00a06 _ad fin._ It\nfollows that the contents of the present chapter were to him of primary\nimportance, and doubtless these lists represent not his own view only\nbut the developed and accepted opinion of the Levitical and priestly\nclasses as a whole, who believed that their institution, duties,\nand privileges generally were of Mosaic origin, whilst to David they\nascribed the particular arrangements in connection with the Temple\nand especially the development of the choral services. The attempt\nto express their faith in concrete genealogical form was inevitable\nand indeed commendable. But the actual facts regarding the growth\nof the Levitical system (see the Additional Note at the end of this\nchapter, pp. 51 f.) were so very different from this theory that the\nartificiality of the lists is apparent to modern analysis, despite\nthe zeal and ingenuity with which they have been compiled. Some points\nwhich indicate the unhistorical nature of the genealogies, together\nwith questions raised by the internal structure of the chapter, will\nbe indicated in the head-notes to the several sections. It must not\nbe thought that such inconsistencies were equally (if at all) present\nto the mind of the Chronicler. For him the actual existence of the\npedigree uniting the priests and Levites of his day with Aaron and\nfinally with Levi was an axiom of thought; the _one_ problem was to\ntrace it out: and he was not restrained in his search by the spirit of\nscientific caution which is second nature to us. Thus in the ancestry\nof the singers (verses 34\u201247), where the lack of information to supply\nthe necessary links in the genealogy was acutely felt, Curtis (p. 135)\npoints out that current genealogical matter seems to have been na\u00efvely\npressed into this particular service on the ground of the identity of\neven a single name! Great allowance must be made for the Chronicler\nand his contemporaries. Even if part of the lists was _consciously_\nfabricated, that proves no more than that he was a man of his age and\nunder the dominance of a theory. As Torrey remarks (_Ezra Studies_,\np. 65), \u201che was not writing history for us but for the good of his\npeople.\u201d There is no case for a charge of religious insincerity. Rather\nthe opposite is true, and his failings as a historian constantly reveal\nthe measure of his faith as a religious man. He was so profoundly\nsure of the truth of the doctrine that its presuppositions, if not\ndiscoverable in historical records, might (he felt) legitimately be\nconjectured. For further information showing how natural and how free\nwas the manipulation of genealogies in ancient times reference may\nbe made to the _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, s.v. _Genealogy_, or to\nM\u1d9cLennan, _Studies in Ancient History_ (2nd series, 1896), chapter ix.\n\n=1\u201215.= In the finished system of the Jewish hierarchy, the Levitical\norder is found to be in three main divisions, \u201cfamilies,\u201d who in\nthe prevailing fashion, believed themselves to be descended from the\nsons of Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. In verses 1\u20123 this view is\nexpressed, and the connection is traced from Levi to Aaron, the first\nof the traditional line of high-priests, which in verses 4\u201215 is given\nthrough Zadok down to the time of the Captivity. (1)\u00a0The intention of\nthe list in verses 4\u201215 is clear. It is given to declare the legitimacy\nof Jehozadak the high-priest who went into exile at the fall of\nJerusalem and was accounted the father of Jeshua the high-priest of the\nReturn (see Ezra iii. 2, etc.; Nehemiah xii. 26; Haggai i. 1; Zechariah\nvi. 11). Thus upon Jehozadak\u2019s legitimacy depended the legitimacy of\nthe post-exilic priesthood of Jerusalem. (2)\u00a0The mechanical nature\nof the list is very evident when it is considered chronologically.\nAllowing the standard 40 years for each of the twenty-three priests\nin the list we get 40 \u00d7 12 + 40 \u00d7 11 = 920 years. This is in agreement\nwith the unhistorical but beautifully regular chronology of the\nPriestly conception of the history, which allowed 480 years from\nthe Exodus (Aaron) to Solomon\u2019s Temple, and again 480 years to the\nfoundation of the second Temple (Jeshua)\u2015\u2015the Captivity (Jehozadak)\nbeing reckoned as taking place in the _eleventh_ generation of the\nsecond period. (3)\u00a0The list presents some noteworthy features. The line\nof high-priests from Eli to Abiathar is ignored, but this is natural,\nsince the ascendancy of the Zadokite line was ascribed to the Divine\nanger against the house of Eli (1 Samuel iii. 12\u201214; 1 Kings ii. 27).\nIt is curious, however, that this list of the high-priests omits\nJehoiada (mentioned in 2 Kings xi. 9; 2 Chronicles xxii. 11) and\nUrijah (2 Kings xvi. 11 ff.) and an Azariah in the reign of Uzziah (2\nChronicles xxvi. 20) who should come between Amariah of Jehoshaphat\u2019s\nreign and Hilkiah in the time of Josiah. (4)\u00a0Finally note that the\nlist of high-priests as far as the reign of David is repeated in verses\n50\u201253. It is a very difficult problem to determine the relation between\nthe two lists (see the head-note to verse 50).\n\n \u00b9The sons of Levi; Gershon\u00b9, Kohath, and Merari.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 16, _Gershom_.\n\n=1.= _The sons of Levi_] So Genesis xlvi. 11; Exodus vi. 16; Numbers\niii. 17, xxvi. 57\u2015\u2015all from P.\n\n \u00b2And the sons of Kohath; Amram, Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel.\n\n=2.= _the sons of Kohath_] So Exodus vi. 18; Numbers iii. 19.\n\n \u00b3And the children of Amram; Aaron, and Moses, and Miriam. And\n the sons of Aaron; Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar.\n\n=3.= _Aaron, and Moses_] The same order in Exodus vi. 20. Aaron was the\nelder (Exodus vii. 7).\n\n_And the sons of Aaron_] So Exodus vi. 23. Nadab and Abihu perished\nchildless; Leviticus x. 1 ff.\n\n \u2074Eleazar begat Phinehas, Phinehas begat Abishua; \u2075and Abishua\n begat Bukki, and Bukki begat Uzzi; \u2076and Uzzi begat Zerahiah, and\n Zerahiah begat Meraioth; \u2077Meraioth begat Amariah, and Amariah\n begat Ahitub;\n\n=4.= _Phinehas_] Numbers xxv. 7 ff., xxxi. 6; Joshua xxii. 13 ff.\n\n \u2078and Ahitub begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Ahimaaz;\n\n=8.= _Ahitub begat Zadok_] So also xviii. 16, but wrongly. The\nassertion that Ahitub was father of Zadok was derived by the Chronicler\nfrom 2 Samuel viii. 17, but the text of that passage has undoubtedly\nbeen altered (see Commentaries _ad loc._) and it read originally \u201cand\nZadok, and Abiathar the son of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub.\u201d Actually\nthere were two leading priestly families in David\u2019s day represented\nrespectively by Zadok and Abiathar. Of these Solomon deposed Abiathar\n(thus fulfilling the curse which was laid on the house of Eli, from\nwhom Abiathar was descended\u2015\u2015see 1 Kings ii. 27), and thereafter the\nline of Zadok became the sole representatives of the supreme priestly\noffice. See also the note on xv. 11.\n\n_Ahimaaz_] 2 Samuel xv. 27, xvii. 17\u201221, xviii. 19 ff.\n\n \u2079and Ahimaaz begat Azariah, and Azariah begat Johanan; \u00b9\u2070and\n Johanan begat Azariah, (he it is that executed the priest\u2019s\n office in the house that Solomon built in Jerusalem:)\n\n=9.= _Azariah_] This Azariah rather than the Azariah of verse 10 would\nhave been contemporary with Solomon, and therefore the notice attached\nto the name Azariah in verse 10 (_he it is that executed the priest\u2019s\noffice in the house that Solomon built in Jerusalem_) belongs to verse\n9. Compare 1 Kings iv. 2.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9and Azariah begat Amariah, and Amariah begat Ahitub; \u00b9\u00b2and\n Ahitub begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Shallum\u00b9;\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 11, _Meshullam_.\n\n=11.= _Amariah_] apparently the contemporary of Jehoshaphat mentioned\nin 2 Chronicles xix. 11.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and Shallum begat Hilkiah, and Hilkiah begat Azariah;\n\n=13.= _Hilkiah_] The high-priest in Josiah\u2019s reign; 2 Kings xxii. 8; 2\nChronicles xxxiv. 14.\n\n \u00b9\u2074and Azariah begat Seraiah, and Seraiah begat Jehozadak; \u00b9\u2075and\n Jehozadak went _into captivity_, when the LORD carried away\n Judah and Jerusalem by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar.\n\n=14.= _Seraiah_] slain soon after the capture of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.;\n2 Kings xxv. 18\u201221; Jeremiah lii. 24\u201227.\n\n_Jehozadak_] _Jozadak_ in Ezra iii. 2, v. 2. His son Jeshua was the\nfirst high-priest after the exile; Haggai i. 1, etc.\n\n\n =16\u201230= (= vi. 1\u201215 according to the Hebrew division).\n THE THREE SONS OF LEVI AND THEIR CLANS.\n\n\n =16\u201219.=\n THE SONS OF LEVI.\n\n \u00b9\u2076The sons of Levi; Gershom\u00b9, Kohath, and Merari.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 1, _Gershon_.\n\n=16.= _Gershom_] elsewhere _Gershon_. _Gershom_ was the name of Moses\u2019\nson; Exodus ii. 22.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And these be the names of the sons of Gershom; Libni and\n Shimei.\n\n=17.= _Libni and Shimei_] Exodus vi. 17; _Libni_ is called _Ladan_\nin xxiii. 7, xxvi. 21, and is to be connected with the Judean town\n_Libnah_.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And the sons of Kohath were Amram, and Izhar, and Hebron, and\n Uzziel.\n\n=18.= _Amram_] through whom the line of high-priests is traced above,\nverse 2 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2079The sons of Merari; Mahli and Mushi. And these are the\n families of the Levites according to their fathers\u2019 _houses_.\n\n=19.= _Mahli and Mushi_] xxiii. 21, xxiv. 26; Exodus vi. 19. Mushi\nis probably a derivative of Moses. For discussion of this point and\nof other evidence (compare verses 16, 17) indicating a relationship\nbetween the Levites and clans from south Judah, see _Encyclopedia\nBritannica_\u00b9\u00b9, s.v. _Levites_, vol. xvi. p. 513.\n\n\n =20, 21.=\n A PEDIGREE FROM GERSHOM.\n\n \u00b2\u2070Of Gershom; Libni his son, Jahath his son, Zimmah his son;\n \u00b2\u00b9Joah\u00b9 his son, Iddo\u00b2 his son, Zerah his son, Jeatherai\u00b3 his\n son.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 42, _Ethan_.\n\n \u00b2 In verse 41, _Adaiah_.\n\n \u00b3 In verse 41, _Ethni_.\n\n=20, 21.= See notes on verses 39\u201243.\n\n\n =22\u201228.=\n THE SONS OF KOHATH TO SAMUEL.\n\n=22\u201228.= See notes on verses 33\u201238.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2The sons of Kohath; Amminadab\u00b9 his son, Korah his son, Assir\n his son;\n\n \u00b9 In verse 2, 18, 38, _Izhar_.\n\n=22.= _Amminadab_] In Exodus vi. 23, the father-in-law of Aaron.\nPerhaps an error here for _Izhar_ (LXX.\u1d2c), through whom the line is\ntraced in verse 38, as in Numbers xvi. 1.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Elkanah his son, and Ebiasaph his son, and Assir his son;\n\n=23.= _Assir his son; Elkanah_] perhaps redundant here, or omitted in\nverse 37, where Ebiasaph is the son of Korah.\n\n \u00b2\u2074Tahath his son, Uriel\u00b9 his son, Uzziah his son, and Shaul his\n son. \u00b2\u2075And the sons of Elkanah; Amasai, and Ahimoth.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 36, _Zephaniah_, _Azariah_, _Joel_.\n\n=24.= _Shaul_] apparently corresponds with Joel, verse 36. The\ndifference in Hebrew is slight, and might easily arise in transcription.\nShaul is to be taken as father of Elkanah (compare verse 36), although\nthe connection is strangely omitted.\n\n \u00b2\u2076As for Elkanah: the sons of Elkanah; Zophai\u00b9 his son, and\n Nahath\u00b2 his son;\n\n \u00b9 In verse 35, _Zuph_.\n\n \u00b2 In verse 34, _Toah_.\n\n=26.= _As for Elkanah: the sons of Elkanah; Zophai his son_] Read\nsimply, following LXX., =Elkanah his son; Zophai his son=.\n\n_Zophai_] From _Zophai_ to Samuel\u2019s sons the list can be compared\nnot only with verses 33\u201235 but with 1 Samuel i. 1 and with viii. 2.\nSuch differences as appear in corresponding names are doubtless due to\ntranscriptional errors.\n\n \u00b2\u2077Eliab\u00b9 his son, Jeroham his son, Elkanah his son.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 34, _Eliel_.\n\n=27.= _Elkanah his son_] add probably, =Samuel his son=.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And the sons of Samuel; the firstborn _Joel_\u00b9, and the second\n Abijah.\n\n \u00b9 So the Syriac. See verse 33, and 1 Samuel viii. 2. The\n Hebrew text has, _Vashni_, _and Abiah_.\n\n=28.= _the firstborn_ Joel, _and the second Abijah_] See the marginal\nnote above. In the Hebrew text the name _Joel_ has been accidentally\nomitted, and _Vashni_ is merely a corruption of the Hebrew for _and the\nsecond_: an interesting example of error in textual transmission.\n\n\n =29, 30.=\n SONS OF MERARI.\n\n \u00b2\u2079The sons of Merari; Mahli, Libni his son, Shimei his son,\n Uzzah his son; \u00b3\u2070Shimea his son, Haggiah his son, Asaiah his son.\n\n=29, 30.= See notes on verses 44\u201247.\n\n=29.= _Libni_ and _Shimei_ are given above (verse 17) as sons of\nGershom.\n\n\n =31\u201247= (= 16\u201232 in the Hebrew division).\n THE SINGERS APPOINTED BY DAVID, AND THEIR ANCESTRY.\n\n=31\u201247.= The three singers, _Heman_, _Asaph_, and _Ethan_ (= _Jeduthun_\nelsewhere except xv. 17 ff.) were the reputed founders of the three\nchoral guilds of the post-exilic period. That these guilds were\nvery gradually formed and in the form known to the Chronicler were\na late post-exilic development is certain, but the precise stages\nof their growth are obscure, see Hastings\u2019 _Dictionary of the Bible_\nIV. 36 end\u201237. Possibly the singers for a considerable time were not\nnecessarily Levites, but eventually they all claimed Levitical origin,\nand the pedigrees here given are the supposed justification of the\nclaim. As the elaborated system of the Temple service (xxiii. ff.)\nwas thought to have been instituted by David, the genealogies of\nthe three singers are so arranged as to make them contemporaries of\nDavid. Comparing these verses with verses 4\u201215, it is evident that the\ngenealogy from Korah has been used for constructing the pedigree of\nHeman (33\u201238), that of Gershom (20\u201222) for Asaph (39\u201243), and to a less\nextent that of Merari (29, 30) for Ethan (44\u201247). But in the line of\nGershom and in that of Merari further names were required, five in the\nformer and eight in the latter case, in order to make the genealogies\nsufficiently long to reach down to the time of David and thus make\nAsaph and Ethan his contemporaries. When these further names are\nexamined they are found to be of a definitely post-exilic character;\nand it is evident that the Chronicler or whoever constructed the\npedigrees utilised recent genealogies of the singers, which for some\nreason seemed to him suitable. The identity of a single name in the two\nlists was apparently deemed sufficient cause for making the connection\n(see note on verses 44\u201247).\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And these are they whom David set over the service of song\n in the house of the LORD, after that the ark had rest.\n\n=31.= _the ark had rest_] i.e. was brought into the city of David for a\npermanent resting-place, compare Psalms cxxxii. 8, 14.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And they ministered with song before the tabernacle of the\n tent of meeting, until Solomon had built the house of the LORD\n in Jerusalem: and they waited\u00b9 on their office according to\n their order.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _stood_.\n\n=32.= _they waited ... order_] a phrase characteristic of the\nChronicler. For _waited_ render rather, as margin, =stood= (compare\nPsalms cxxxv. 2): i.e. Heman the leader stood in the central position,\nAsaph on his right hand (verse 39) and Ethan on his left (verse 44).\n\n\n =33\u201238.=\n THE DESCENT OF HEMAN, DAVID\u2019S SINGER,\n THROUGH KOHATH FROM LEVI.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And these are they that waited\u00b9, and their sons. Of the sons\n of the Kohathites: Heman the singer, the son of Joel, the son\n of Samuel; \u00b3\u2074the son of Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of\n Eliel, the son of Toah\u00b2; \u00b3\u2075the son of Zuph\u00b3, the son of Elkanah,\n the son of Mahath, the son of Amasai; \u00b3\u2076the son of Elkanah, the\n son of Joel\u2074, the son of Azariah, the son of Zephaniah;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _stood_.\n\n \u00b2 In verse 26, _Nahath_.\n\n \u00b3 In verse 26, _Zophai_.\n\n \u2074 In verse 24, _Shaul_, _Uzziah_, _Uriel_.\n\n=33.= _Heman_] the guild of Heman, as the present pedigree indicates,\nis reckoned (with what measure of historical ground is uncertain) to\nbe of Levitical descent and of the Kohathite family: see also _Korah_\nbelow, verse 37.\n\n \u00b3\u2077the son of Tahath, the son of Assir, the son of Ebiasaph, the\n son of Korah;\n\n=37.= _Korah_] the sons of Korah figure in the titles of various Psalms\n(e.g. Psalms 44\u201249, 84, 85) and probably represent an earlier stage\nin the development of choral worship of the Temple. With this Korahite\nguild the guild of Heman evidently was associated, though whether by a\nprocess of development or of amalgamation it is impossible to say. It\nis noteworthy that other references to Korah (compare Genesis xxxvi. 5;\n1 Chronicles ii. 43) indicate that the clan was originally of Edomite\n(Calebite) blood.\n\n \u00b3\u2078the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son\n of Israel.\n\n=38.= _Izhar_] see note on Amminadab, verse 22.\n\n\n =39\u201243.=\n THE DESCENT OF ASAPH, DAVID\u2019S SINGER,\n THROUGH GERSHOM FROM LEVI.\n\n \u00b3\u2079And his brother Asaph, who stood on his right hand, even Asaph\n the son of Berechiah, the son of Shimea; \u2074\u2070the son of Michael,\n the son of Baaseiah, the son of Malchijah;\n\n=39, 40.= _Berechiah ... Shimea ... Michael ... Baaseiah ...\nMalchijah_] these are the five additional names inserted to lengthen\nthe pedigree and so make Asaph contemporary with David (see head-note\nabove).\n\n=40.= _Baaseiah_] Read, as LXX., =Maaseiah=.\n\n \u2074\u00b9the son of Ethni, the son of Zerah, the son of Adaiah; \u2074\u00b2the\n son of Ethan, the son of Zimmah, the son of Shimei; \u2074\u00b3the son of\n Jahath, the son of Gershom, the son of Levi.\n\n=41.= _Ethni_] = Jeatherai, verse 21. Here, and in the following\nnames, the divergences from the corresponding names in verses 20, 21\nare not nearly so great in Hebrew and can be easily accounted for.\nThe correspondence fails in the case of the son and father of Jahath\n(compare verse 20 with 43). This however may be due simply to the\nomission of the names in question, Shimei in 20, Libni in 43; and other\nexplanations could be given.\n\n\n =44\u201247.=\n THE DESCENT OF ETHAN, DAVID\u2019S SINGER,\n THROUGH MERARI FROM LEVI.\n\n \u2074\u2074And on the left hand their brethren the sons of Merari: Ethan\u00b9\n the son of Kishi\u00b2, the son of Abdi, the son of Malluch; \u2074\u2075the\n son of Hashabiah, the son of Amaziah, the son of Hilkiah; \u2074\u2076the\n son of Amzi, the son of Bani, the son of Shemer;\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 16, _Jeduthun_.\n\n \u00b2 In chapter xv. 17, _Kushaiah_.\n\n=44\u201247.= Only the first three names of the table of Merari in verse 29\nare used by the compiler of Ethan\u2019s pedigree. In place of the last four\nnames he utilised a late list of nine names, the point of connection\nbeing found in the first, _Shemer_ (verse 46), which was identified\nwith the _Shimei_ of verse 29.\n\n_Ethan_] = Jeduthun: see note on xvi. 41.\n\n \u2074\u2077the son of Mahli, the son of Mushi, the son of Merari, the son\n of Levi.\n\n=47.= _Mahli, the son of Mushi_] According to xxiii. 23, xxiv. 30,\nMushi had a son Mahli, named after Mahli, his brother (verse 19);\nand the natural conclusion is that the names in these verses (44\u201247)\nare the line of descent from Merari through Mushi, as those in verses\n29, 30 are through Mahli. Against this simple explanation is the late\ncharacter of several names from Kishi to Bani (44\u201246), and therefore\nthe more complex statement made in the previous note may be correct.\n\n\n =48, 49= (= 33, 34 according to the Hebrew division).\n THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN LEVITES AND AARONITES.\n\n \u2074\u2078And their brethren the Levites were appointed\u00b9 for all the\n service of the tabernacle of the house of God.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _given_. See Numbers iii. 9.\n\n=48.= _their brethren the Levites_] i.e. other Levites, who were\nneither singers nor priests.\n\n_appointed_] Hebrew, as margin, =given=, in allusion to Numbers iii. 9,\nxviii. 6.\n\n \u2074\u2079But Aaron and his sons offered\u00b9 upon the altar of burnt\n offering, and upon the altar of incense, for all the work of the\n most holy place, and to make atonement for Israel, according to\n all that Moses the servant of God had commanded.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _burnt incense_.\n\n=49.= _Aaron and his sons_] i.e. the priests as opposed to the\nLevites, in accordance with the distinction characteristic of the\nlater legislation. See the Additional Note, pp. 51, 52.\n\n_the altar of burnt offering_] Exodus xxvii. 1\u20128.\n\n_the altar of incense_] Exodus xxx. 1\u201210.\n\n_to make atonement_] compare Leviticus iv. 31, xvi.; 2 Chronicles\nxxix. 24.\n\n\n =50\u201253= (= 35\u201238 according to the Hebrew division).\n THE LINE OF AARON TO AHIMAAZ.\n\n \u2075\u2070And these are the sons of Aaron; Eleazar his son, Phinehas his\n son, Abishua his son; \u2075\u00b9Bukki his son, Uzzi his son, Zerahiah\n his son; \u2075\u00b2Meraioth his son, Amariah his son, Ahitub his son;\n \u2075\u00b3Zadok his son, Ahimaaz his son.\n\nThis is a fragment, slightly changed in wording, of the genealogy\ngiven in verses 4\u201214. It goes as far as the reign of David. Some\nwriters maintain that verses 4\u201214 are an interpolation in the text\nof Chronicles, and that the present passage is the primary list of\nhigh-priests. But the arguments in favour of that view seem to the\npresent writer outweighed by the two considerations adduced by Curtis,\n_Chronicles_, p. 127: (1)\u00a0\u201cthat a list of high-priests thus inserted\nbetween verse 49 (the duties of all the sons of Aaron) and verses\n54 ff. (the cities of all the Aaronidae), seems out of place,\u201d as it\nbreaks the thread of the Chronicler\u2019s arrangement of the material; and\n(2)\u00a0that its insertion might well be due to a scribe who \u201cexpected a\nlist of the sons of Aaron after the verse describing their duties\u2015\u2015just\nas the list of Levites precedes the verse detailing their duties.\u201d\n\n\n =54\u201281= (= 39\u201266 according to the Hebrew division).\n THE FORTY-EIGHT LEVITIC CITIES.\n\nThis section has been adopted with some rearrangement from the parallel\npassage in Joshua. In Joshua the number of cities taken from each group\nof tribes and given to its respective division of the Levites is first\nstated, no city being named; and next the names of the cities are given\nunder each division of the Levites and under the name of the tribe\nfrom which the cities were taken. In Chronicles the cities given to the\nAaronites are first mentioned by name and reckoned to be thirteen in\nnumber (verses 55\u201260); next the cities given to each remaining division\nof the Levites are reckoned shortly by number only (verses 61\u201263);\nlastly, these cities are separately reckoned at length by name only\n(verses 66\u201281). This rearrangement is not happy; perhaps the Chronicler\noriginally intended to give the Aaronite cities only by name as well as\nnumber, and so verses 66\u201281 (containing the names of the non-Aaronite\ncities) may be a supplement to the original text. Notice that no names\nof cities taken from Simeon are given; but this apparently arises\nthrough the Chronicler\u2019s rearrangement of the parallel passage in\nJoshua; for verse 65, which here follows the list of Aaronite cities,\nmentions Simeon, and in the original context (Joshua xxi. 9) it\n_precedes_ the list.\n\n\n (CRITICAL NOTE ON =54\u201281=.)\n\nThe text of the passage has suffered in transcription. In verses 55\u201260\neleven names are given, but thirteen are reckoned (verse 60), the\nexplanation being that the names _Juttah_ and _Gibeon_ (Joshua xxi. 16,\n17) have fallen out. In verse 61, after or before _Manasseh_, the names\nof _Ephraim_ and _Dan_ have fallen out (compare verse 66 and Joshua xxi.\n5); Manasseh contributed only two out of the ten cities. Before verse\n69 we must restore from Joshua xxi. 23 the words, _And out of the tribe\nof Dan, Eltekeh with her suburbs, Gibbethon with her suburbs_. In verse\n77 or immediately before verse 78 two names of cities of Zebulun have\nfallen out; compare verse 63 (\u201ctwelve cities\u201d) with verses 77\u201281 (ten\ncities only are named).\n\n\n =54\u201260= (= Joshua xxi. 10\u201219).\n THE [THIRTEEN] CITIES OF THE AARONITES.\n\n \u2075\u2074Now these are their dwelling places according to their\n encampments in their borders: to the sons of Aaron, of the\n families of the Kohathites, for theirs was the _first_ lot,\n\n=54.= _Now these ... borders_] the words are supplied by the Chronicler.\nOwing to his rearrangement of the material, the original introduction\n(i.e. Joshua xxi. 9) appears in this chapter as verse 65 (where see\nnote).\n\n_encampments_] Properly, the circular encampments of a nomadic tribe;\nhere used more freely = habitations.\n\n \u2075\u2075to them they gave Hebron in the land of Judah, and the suburbs\n thereof round about it;\n\n=55.= _suburbs_] compare xiii. 2, note.\n\n \u2075\u2076but the fields of the city, and the villages thereof, they\n gave to Caleb the son of Jephunneh.\n\n=56.= _to Caleb_] Joshua xxi. 12; Judges i. 20.\n\n \u2075\u2077And to the sons of Aaron they gave the cities of refuge,\n Hebron; Libnah also with her suburbs, and Jattir, and Eshtemoa\n with her suburbs;\n\n=57.= _the cities of refuge, Hebron_] Read, =the city of refuge, Hebron=\n(compare Joshua xxi. 13), Hebron being the only city of refuge here\nmentioned (Joshua xx. 7).\n\n_Libnah_] in the south-west of Judah, Joshua x. 29; 2 Kings viii. 22,\nxix. 8.\n\n_Eshtemoa_] the modern es-Semu\u2018a, south of Hebron. Compare iv. 17.\n\n \u2075\u2078and Hilen\u00b9 with her suburbs, Debir with her suburbs;\n\n \u00b9 In Joshua xxi. 15, _Holon_.\n\n=58.= _Hilen_] In Joshua xxi. 15, _Holon_.\n\n_Debir_] identified with modern D\u0101har\u012bjeh, south-west of Hebron. It\nis called _Kiriath-sepher_ (Judges i. 11) and _Kiriath-sannah_ (Joshua\nxv. 49).\n\n \u2075\u2079and Ashan\u00b9 with her suburbs, and Beth-shemesh with her suburbs:\n\n \u00b9 In Joshua xxi. 16, _Ain_.\n\n=59.= _Ashan with her suburbs_] Joshua xxi. 16 has _Ain_ for _Ashan_,\nand adds, _and Juttah with her suburbs_. Compare the Critical Note\nabove.\n\n_Beth-shemesh_] Joshua xv. 10; 1 Samuel vi. 9; 2 Kings xiv. 11, 13\n(= 2 Chronicles xxv. 21, 23). A town in the north-west of Judah, now\n_\u2018Ain Shems_, situated at the point at which the hill-country of Judah\nbegins, as one goes by the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem (B\u00e4deker,\n_Palestine_\u2075, p. 14).\n\n \u2076\u2070and out of the tribe of Benjamin; Geba with her suburbs, and\n Allemeth\u00b3 with her suburbs, and Anathoth with her suburbs. All\n their cities throughout their families were thirteen cities.\n\n \u00b3 In Joshua xxi. 18, _Almon_.\n\n=60.= _of Benjamin; Geba_] In Joshua xxi. 17 _Gibeon and her suburbs_\nis inserted before _Geba_. Compare the Critical Note above. Geba was\nsituated by the pass of Michmash, some six miles from Jerusalem;\ncompare 1 Samuel vi. 9 ff.\n\n_Allemeth_] In Joshua xxi. 18, _Almon_.\n\n_thirteen cities_] Compare the Critical Note above.\n\n\n =61\u201265= (compare Joshua xxi. 26, 33, 40).\n DISTRIBUTION OF THIRTY-FIVE OTHER CITIES\n TO THE REST OF THE LEVITES.\n\n \u2076\u00b9And unto the rest of the sons of Kohath _were given_ by lot,\n out of the family of the tribe, out of the half tribe, the half\n of Manasseh, ten cities.\n\n=61.= _the rest of the sons of Kohath_] i.e. the Kohathites who were\nnot _sons of Aaron_ (verse 54).\n\n_out of the family ... Manasseh_] read =out of the families of the\ntribe of Ephraim and out of the tribe of Dan and out of the half tribe\nof Manasseh=. See the Critical Note on verses 54\u201281.\n\n \u2076\u00b2And to the sons of Gershom, according to their families, out\n of the tribe of Issachar, and out of the tribe of Asher, and out\n of the tribe of Naphtali, and out of the tribe of Manasseh in\n Bashan, thirteen cities.\n\n=62.= _the tribe of Manasseh in Bashan_] i.e. the half tribe of\nManasseh beyond Jordan.\n\n \u2076\u00b3Unto the sons of Merari _were given_ by lot, according to\n their families, out of the tribe of Reuben, and out of the tribe\n of Gad, and out of the tribe of Zebulun, twelve cities. \u2076\u2074And\n the children of Israel gave to the Levites the cities with their\n suburbs.\n\n=63.= _twelve cities_] The total number of Levitic cities (verse\n60 thirteen, verse 61 ten, verse 62 thirteen, verse 63 twelve) was\nforty-eight (so Joshua xxi. 41), of which the Kohathites, as the\nlargest division (compare xv. 5, note), received twenty-three or nearly\nhalf.\n\n \u2076\u2075And they gave by lot out of the tribe of the children of Judah,\n and out of the tribe of the children of Simeon, and out of the\n tribe of the children of Benjamin, these cities which are\n mentioned by name.\n\n=65.= _by lot_] as a means of gaining Divine sanction for the\nassignment of cities. This verse (= Joshua xxi. 9) is plainly\nunsuitable in its present context. In Joshua it is the introduction\nto the list of Aaronic cities (here verses 54\u201260). The Chronicler,\nhaving rearranged the material of his source, nevertheless preferred\nto transcribe this verse, despite the lack of harmony with the context;\nor possibly, if verses 66\u201281 are an addition to the original text of\nChronicles (see the head-note on verses 54\u201281), verse 65 may also be\na later insertion intended to help as a connecting link between verses\n64 and 66 ff.\n\n\n =66\u201281.=\n CITIES OF THE LEVITES.\n\n\n =66\u201270= (= Joshua xxi. 20\u201225).\n THE [TEN] CITIES OF THE NON-AARONITE KOHATHITES.\n\n \u2076\u2076And some of the families of the sons of Kohath had cities of\n their borders out of the tribe of Ephraim.\n\n=66.= _of their borders_] rather, as Joshua xxi. 20, =of their lot=\n(the difference in Hebrew is very slight).\n\n \u2076\u2077And they gave unto them the cities of refuge, Shechem in the\n hill country of Ephraim with her suburbs; Gezer also with her\n suburbs;\n\n=67.= _the cities of refuge, Shechem_] Read (a slight change in Hebrew)\n=the city of refuge, Shechem=. Compare verse 57, note.\n\n_Shechem_] Genesis xii. 6, xxxiii. 18; Joshua xxiv. 1; Judges ix. 1;\n1 Kings xii. 1. Shechem is the modern Nabulus, situated almost in the\nmiddle of Palestine.\n\n_Gezer_] Joshua xvi. 3; Judges i. 29; 1 Kings ix. 16. It is the\nmodern Tell Jezer about 18 miles north-west of Jerusalem. The site\nhas recently been excavated with excellent results\u2015\u2015see Macalister,\n_The Excavation of Gezer_, or Driver, _Modern Research Illustrating\nthe Bible_ (Schweich Lectures, 1908).\n\n \u2076\u2078and\u00b9 Jokmeam with her suburbs, and Beth-horon with her suburbs;\n\n \u00b9 See Joshua xxi. 22\u201239, where some of the names are different.\n\n=68.= _Jokmeam_] In Joshua xxi. 22, _Kibzaim_. The two words resemble\none another more closely in Hebrew, and are to be taken as various\nreadings of the same name. Nothing is known of a _Kibzaim_ in Ephraim.\nA _Jokmeam_ is mentioned 1 Kings iv. 12.\n\n_Beth-horon_] Joshua x. 10, 11, xvi. 3, 5; 1 Maccabees iii. 24. There\nwere two cities, a lower and an upper Beth-horon, the modern _Beitur_,\n\u201cnear the head and the foot respectively of the ascent from the\nMaritime Plain to the plateau of Benjamin.\u201d\n\n \u2076\u2079and Aijalon with her suburbs, and Gath-rimmon with her suburbs:\n\n=69.= _and Aijalon_] _Aijalon_ and _Gath-rimmon_ were in Dan near the\nJaffa road some 13 miles from Jerusalem; compare Joshua xxi. 23, 24.\nSee also the Critical Note on verses 54\u201281.\n\n \u2077\u2070and out of the half tribe of Manasseh; Aner with her suburbs,\n and Bileam with her suburbs, for the rest of the family of the\n sons of Kohath.\n\n=70.= _the half tribe of Manasseh_] the western half tribe; the eastern\nis mentioned verse 71.\n\n_Aner_] Read probably =Taanach=, as in vii. 29; Joshua xxi. 25; Judges\nv. 19. Taanach was situated in the plain of Esdraelon, some four miles\nsouth of Megiddo.\n\n_Bileam_] read =Ibleam=, compare Judges i. 27; 2 Kings ix. 27. In\nJoshua xxi. 25, _Gath-rimmon_, an error of dittography.\n\n_for the rest ... Kohath_] a fragment of Joshua xxi. 26.\n\n\n =71\u201276= (= Joshua xxi. 27\u201232).\n THE THIRTEEN CITIES OF THE SONS OF GERSHOM.\n\n \u2077\u00b9Unto the sons of Gershom _were given_, out of the family of\n the half tribe of Manasseh, Golan in Bashan with her suburbs,\n and Ashtaroth with her suburbs:\n\n=71.= _Golan_] a city of refuge, Joshua xxi. 27. The name of this city\nis still preserved in _Jolan_ (_Jaulan_), the name of a district east\nof Jordan extending from Hermon to the Jarmuk.\n\n_Ashtaroth_] mentioned with Edrei in Joshua ix. 10 as the capital of\nOg, king of Bashan. The name testifies to the worship of Ashtoreth.\n\n \u2077\u00b2and out of the tribe of Issachar; Kedesh with her suburbs,\n Daberath with her suburbs;\n\n=72.= Kedesh] Read =Kishion= with Joshua xxi. 28 (so Joshua xix. 20).\n\n_Daberath_] the modern Dab\u016briyeh at the foot of Mount Tabor.\n\n \u2077\u00b3and Ramoth with her suburbs, and Anem with her suburbs:\n\n=73.= _Ramoth_] _Jarmuth_, Joshua xxi. 29; or perhaps _Remeth_, Joshua\nxix. 21.\n\n_Anem_] Read =En-gannim= with Joshua xxi. 29. Probably the modern large\nvillage of _Jen\u00een_ on the edge of the plain of Esdraelon.\n\n \u2077\u2074and out of the tribe of Asher; Mashal with her suburbs, and\n Abdon with her suburbs;\n\n=74.= _Mashal_] _Mishal_, Joshua xxi. 30 (compare Joshua xix. 26,\nRevised Version).\n\n \u2077\u2075and Hukok with her suburbs, and Rehob with her suburbs:\n\n=75.= _Hukok_] Read =Helkath= with Joshua xxi. 31 (compare Joshua xix.\n25).\n\n \u2077\u2076and out of the tribe of Naphtali; Kedesh in Galilee with her\n suburbs, and Hammon with her suburbs, and Kiriathaim with her\n suburbs.\n\n=76.= _Kedesh in Galilee_] called _Kedesh-naphtali_ in Judges iv. 6;\nit is the modern _Kedes_, situated on a lofty plateau overlooking the\nwaters of _\u1e24\u016bleh_ (_Merom_). It was a city of refuge, Joshua xxi. 32.\n\n_Hammon ... Kiriathaim_] In Joshua xxi. 32, _Hammoth-dor ... Kartan_.\n\n\n =77\u201281= (= Joshua xxi. 34\u201239).\n THE [TWELVE] CITIES OF THE SONS OF MERARI.\n\n \u2077\u2077Unto the rest of _the Levites_, the sons of Merari, _were\n given_, out of the tribe of Zebulun, Rimmono with her suburbs,\n Tabor with her suburbs:\n\n=77.= _Rimmono ... Tabor_] Read =Rimmon= or =Rimmonah=. Against these\ntwo names there are four in Joshua xxi. 34, 35; _Jokneam_, _Kartah_,\n_Dimnah_ and _Nahalal_. As regards the number of the cities the text\nof Joshua is certainly right. See Critical Note on verses 54\u201281.\n\n_Tabor_] No city, but only a mountain named _Tabor_ is known to us, as\nhaving certainly existed in Old Testament times. A city however named\n_Tabor_ existed on the mountain as early as 218 B.C., and it may have\nbeen as old as the times of the Chronicler. Mount Tabor was in Issachar\nnear the border of Zebulun. For _Nahalal_, the reading in Joshua,\ncompare Joshua xix. 15; Judges i. 30. Compare B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075,\np. 250.\n\n \u2077\u2078and beyond the Jordan at Jericho, on the east side of Jordan,\n _were given them_, out of the tribe of Reuben, Bezer in the\n wilderness with her suburbs, and Jahzah with her suburbs, \u2077\u2079and\n Kedemoth with her suburbs, and Mephaath with her suburbs:\n\n=78.= _at Jericho_] The crossing-place of the Jordan nearest to Reuben\nwas at Jericho. For the phrase _Jordan at Jericho_ compare Joshua xvi.\n1.\n\n_in the wilderness_] further defined by the addition _in the\ntable-land_ (Deuteronomy iv. 43, Revised Version margin). Bezer was\namong the high pasture lands of Reuben. It was a city of refuge.\n\n_Jahzah_] also called _Jahaz_. Compare Judges xi. 20; Isaiah xv. 4.\n\n \u2078\u2070and out of the tribe of Gad; Ramoth in Gilead with her suburbs,\n and Mahanaim with her suburbs,\n\n=80.= _Ramoth in Gilead_] a city of refuge, Joshua xxi. 38. See 1 Kings\nxxii. 3; 2 Kings ix. 1.\n\n_Mahanaim_] Genesis xxxii. 2.\n\n \u2078\u00b9and Heshbon with her suburbs, and Jazer with her suburbs.\n\n=81.= _Heshbon_] Numbers xxi. 25, 26; Isaiah xv. 4.\n\n_Jazer_] Numbers xxi. 32 (Revised Version); Isaiah xvi. 8.\n\n\n NOTE ON THE LEVITES.\n\nThe priestly organisation known to the Chronicler represents the latest\nstage of a system, the development of which can to some extent be\ntraced in the Old Testament records. (1)\u00a0It appears from the earliest\nsources that the great \u201cpriestly\u201d duty of sacrifice at one period did\nnot require a priest for its due performance but might be, and was,\nundertaken by any responsible male. For example in Exodus xxiv. 5, an\noccasion of the deepest solemnity, sacrifices are spoken of as offered\nby \u201cyoung men of the children of Israel.\u201d In Exodus xxxiii. 7\u201211 it is\nclear that the other great function of early religion, charge of the\nresponses given by the Divine oracle, is regarded as being under the\ncontrol of Moses. In fact it would seem that in the earlier period\nthere were neither priests nor Levites as a religious order; at any\nrate, as an order exercising a _monopoly_ in the religious functions\nwhich they afterwards claimed the sole right of discharging. (2)\u00a0In\ncourse of time those who administered the oracle and offered sacrifices\nat the manifold shrines and high places of Palestine gained importance\nand were recognised as a distinct religious class, _priests_; and\npersons claiming descent from Levi were numerous or prominent among\nthem. But the _right_ of offering sacrifices was still by no means\nconfined to these priests of the shrines. The priesthood of the various\nshrines was often hereditary, passing on from father to son; and,\neven apart from that fact, it was most natural that members of this\nreligious order, or perhaps one should say \u201cprofession,\u201d should be\nthought of as connected by blood-relationship. Eventually they were all\nreckoned descendants of Levi. (3) After the exile and the suppression\nof the local shrines of Judah, the pre-eminence of the priests or\nLevites of _Jerusalem_ was definitely established, and (as Ezekiel\nhad suggested) such priests of the local shrines as were satisfied\nto migrate to Jerusalem became subordinate to the original ministers\nof the Temple there. All were accounted sons of Levi; but only the\noriginal Jerusalem priests, who traced their descent through the\nLevitical family of Aaron, were entitled to rank as _priests_: the\nrest were Levites but not priests. Thus there arose a distinction\nin the ranks of the religious officials. (4)\u00a0Finally, the functions\nand privileges of priests as distinct from Levites were carefully\ndiscriminated, and the tradition that their origin as a religious order\nwas due to Moses became firmly established, whilst the complex system\nof their organisation, in particular the subdivisions of the Levites as\nsingers and doorkeepers, was confidently ascribed to David. Chronicles\nconsistently represents this latest stage of development. For a concise\nstatement of the facts see M\u1d9cNeile, _Numbers_, pp. xiv ff. in the\npresent series; and for further discussion the appropriate articles in\nthe Dictionaries; especially Cook in _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, s.v.\n_Levites_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n\n\n =1\u201240.=\n GENEALOGIES OF SIX REMAINING TRIBES.\n\nThe treatment of the several tribes in this chapter is very unequal. In\nthe case of Issachar (=1\u20125=), Zebulun (=6\u201212=, see note verse 6), and\nAsher (=30\u201240=), genealogies are given and the number of fighting-men\nof each tribe is stated. To Naphtali is devoted a single verse (=13=),\ngiving only the names of his sons. For Manasseh and Ephraim (=14\u201229=)\ngenealogies are given and their possessions are shortly enumerated. The\nmention of Dan is obliterated, owing to the state of the text of verse\n12.\n\n\n =1\u20125.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF ISSACHAR.\n\n \u00b9And of the sons of Issachar; Tola, and Puah\u00b9, Jashub, and\n Shimron, four.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xlvi. 13, _Puvah, and Iob_.\n\n=1.= _the sons of Issachar_] Genesis xlvi. 13; Numbers xxvi. 23, 24.\nverses 2\u20125 are from an unknown source, or from the Chronicler himself.\n\n_Tola_] the name of one of the minor Judges (Judges x. 1). He is there\ndescribed as \u201cTola the son of Puah, dwelling [Hebrew _josheb_] in\nShamir.\u201d No descendants are mentioned from Puah, Jashub, and Shimron,\nbut only from Tola; and it has been suggested that these four sons\nof Issachar are imaginary, being simply deduced from the statement\nin Judges\u2015\u2015Jashub = _josheb_, and Shimron = _Shamir_. This is very\ningenious but by no means convincing.\n\n_Puah_] In Genesis and Numbers _Puvah_ (Revised Version).\n\n_Jashub_] So in Numbers, but in Genesis _Iob_.\n\n \u00b2And the sons of Tola; Uzzi, and Rephaiah, and Jeriel, and\n Jahmai, and Ibsam, and Shemuel, heads of their fathers\u2019 houses,\n _to wit_, of Tola; mighty men of valour in their generations:\n their number in the days of David was two and twenty thousand\n and six hundred.\n\n=2.= _of their fathers\u2019 houses_] i.e. clans or families; see note on\nv. 13.\n\n_in their generations_] Render, =after= (or =according to=) =their\ngenerations=, the rendering given to the same phrase in Genesis x. 32,\nxxv. 13.\n\n_their number_] i.e. of the divisions which claimed _Tola_ as ancestor.\n\n_in the days of David_] xxi. 1 ff. (= 2 Samuel xxiv. 1 ff.).\n\n \u00b3And the sons of Uzzi; Izrahiah: and the sons of Izrahiah;\n Michael, and Obadiah, and Joel, Isshiah, five: all of them chief\n men.\n\n=3.= _five_] i.e. reckoning the four grandsons as sons.\n\n \u2074And with them, by their generations, after their fathers\u2019\n houses, were bands of the host for war, six and thirty thousand:\n for they had many wives and sons.\n\n=4.= _by their generations_] i.e. according to descent. Each head\ncommanded men that were his kinsfolk.\n\n \u2075And their brethren among all the families of Issachar, mighty\n men of valour, reckoned in all by genealogy, were fourscore and\n seven thousand.\n\n=5.= _fourscore and seven thousand_] In Numbers ii. 6 Issachar is\nreckoned at 54,400, and in Numbers xxvi. 25 at 64,300.\n\n\n =6\u201212.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF ZEBULUN.\n\n=6\u201212.= According to the existing text these verses are a genealogy of\nBenjamin; but, as such, they present most serious difficulties. Notice\n(1)\u00a0that the customary \u201csons of\u201d is lacking in the Hebrew text before\nBenjamin: (2) that the sons of Benjamin here number _three_, whereas\nin Numbers xxvi. 38, 39, they are _five_ (_five_ also in 1 Chronicles\nviii. 2!), and in Genesis xlii. 21 _ten_; and further that one of\nthe sons here mentioned, Jediael, is nowhere else referred to as a\nBenjamite: (3)\u00a0that the sons of Bela (verse 7) are entirely different\nin viii. 3: and (4)\u00a0that in general the names in the list (with only\nthree certain exceptions and two of them place-names) are not elsewhere\nfound in lists of Benjamite names\u2015\u2015a startling fact. (5)\u00a0Finally and\nmost important of all, a genealogy of Benjamin is given in chapter\nviii., exactly where we might expect to find it according to the order\nin which the Chronicler describes the tribes.\n\nThe first of these points could be (and has usually been) explained\nby the elision of some letters; for the words \u201cthe sons of\u201d (B\u1d49n\u00ea)\nin Hebrew writing most closely resemble \u201cBen\u201d the first syllable of\nBenjamin. For a few other minor difficulties tentative suggestions have\nbeen put forward, but are very unsatisfying, whilst for most of the\nfeatures noted above, and especially for the most important of them, no\nproper explanation can be given on the supposition that the list really\nis a genealogy of Benjamin. It is therefore most probable that the view\nurged by Curtis, _Chronicles_, p. 127, should be adopted. He finds in\nthese verses the genealogy of _Zebulun_, the absence of which otherwise\nis a striking feature of the genealogies in these chapters. The letters\nwhich are now taken to be the first part of the word _Benjamin_ should\nbe read _B\u1d49n\u00ea_ (i.e. _the sons of_), and the following letters are a\ncorruption of Zebulun, which was originally followed by the names of\nZebulun\u2019s three sons, Sered and Elon and Jahleel, as given in Genesis\nxlvi. 14. The changes involved by this suggestion may seem violent in\nEnglish, but they are by no means so in the Hebrew, and moreover it\nmust be understood that they all follow inevitably or at least most\nnaturally upon the slight initial error whereby \u201cthe sons of Zebulun\u201d\nwas corrupted into \u201cBenjamin.\u201d The development and details of Curtis\u2019\nreasoning cannot be set forth except in connection with the Hebrew text,\nand it must therefore suffice here to indicate the one essential point,\nand to remark that the convincing feature of his hypothesis is that it\nfurnishes a clear and natural explanation of all the difficulties noted\nabove.\n\n \u2076_The sons of_ Benjamin; Bela, and Becher, and Jediael, three.\n\n=6.= _Bela, and Becher, and Jediael_] Contrast viii. 2. Read, following\nGenesis xlvi. 14, =Sered and Elon and Jahleel=.\n\n \u2077And the sons of Bela; Ezbon, and Uzzi, and Uzziel, and Jerimoth,\n and Iri, five; heads of fathers\u2019 houses, mighty men of valour;\n and they were reckoned by genealogy twenty and two thousand and\n thirty and four.\n\n=7.= _the sons of Bela_] Contrast viii. 3; and read instead the =sons\nof Sered=. These are differently stated in viii. 3\u20125.\n\n \u2078And the sons of Becher; Zemirah, and Joash, and Eliezer, and\n Elioenai, and Omri, and Jeremoth, and Abijah, and Anathoth,\n and Alemeth. All these were the sons of Becher. \u2079And they were\n reckoned by genealogy, after their generations, heads of their\n fathers\u2019 houses, mighty men of valour, twenty thousand and two\n hundred.\n\n=8.= _Becher_] Read =Elon=.\n\n_Anathoth, and Alemeth_] both names of places in Benjamin; vi. 60 (45,\n_Hebrew_, \u201cAllemeth\u201d); Jeremiah i. 1. These are the only place-names in\nthe list, and they are admittedly Benjamite: as to the significance of\nthis fact see note on _Ehud_, verse 10.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the sons of Jediael; Bilhan: and the sons of Bilhan; Jeush,\n and Benjamin, and Ehud, and Chenaanah, and Zethan, and Tarshish,\n and Ahishahar.\n\n=10.= _Jediael_] or rather _Jahleel_.\n\n_Benjamin, and Ehud_] The error in verse 6 by which this Zebulunite\nlist becomes ostensibly Benjamite must have been very early. When\nonce it had arisen, the tendency to introduce names which were to be\nexpected in a Benjamite genealogy was inevitably strong. This is the\nground on which the names _Anathoth_ and _Alemeth_ (verse 8) are to\nbe explained, as also _Shuppim_ and _Huppim_ (verse 12). Most clearly,\nhowever, is the tendency illustrated by the present verse, where the\nreading _Benjamin and Ehud_ most probably has its origin in a marginal\naddition \u201cand Ehud the Benjamite\u201d (from Judges iii. 15) which was later\ninserted in the text as two separate names.\n\n_Tarshish_] It is said of Zebulun in Genesis xlix. 13 that he shall\nbe \u201ca haven for ships,\u201d and _Tarshish_, absolutely unknown as a Hebrew\npersonal name, is regularly used in the Old Testament in connection\nwith ships and commerce by sea. It would be astonishingly out of\nplace in a genealogy of Benjamin, but is appropriate in one of Zebulun\n(compare Genesis xlix. 13 \u201cZebulun shall dwell at the haven of the\nsea\u201d).\n\n \u00b9\u00b9All these were sons of Jediael, according to the heads\n of their fathers\u2019 _houses_, mighty men of valour, seventeen\n thousand and two hundred, that were able to go forth in the host\n for war.\n\n=11.= _able to go forth_] the total number of warriors is here 59,434;\ncompare 50,000 in xii. 33; and compare Numbers i. 37, xxvi. 41.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Shuppim\u00b9 also, and Huppim, the sons of Ir\u00b2, Hushim, the sons\n of Aher\u00b3.\n\n \u00b9 In Numbers xxvi. 39, _Shephupham_ and _Hupham_.\n\n \u00b2 In verse 7, _Iri_.\n\n \u00b3 In Numbers xxvi. 38, _Ahiram_.\n\n=12.= _Shuppim also, and Huppim_] for the spelling compare viii. 5,\nNumbers xxvi. 39, and Genesis xlvi. 21. These Benjamite names are an\naddition, and illustrate the tendency referred to above in the note on\n_Benjamin and Ehud_, verse 10.\n\n\n =12b.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF DAN.\n\n_Ir_] compare verse 7, Iri. But see following note.\n\n_Hushim, the sons of Aher_] In _Aher_ (literally \u201canother\u201d) some\ncommentators find the word _Dan_. More probably _Ir_ is a corruption\nfor Dan, and the word _Aher_ an error for \u201cone\u201d (the differences are\nsmall in Hebrew). Following the indication of Genesis xlvi. 23 and the\nLXX., read therefore =the sons of Dan, Hushim his son, one=.\n\n\n =13.= (= Genesis xlvi. 24).\n THE GENEALOGY OF NAPHTALI.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3The sons of Naphtali; Jahziel\u00b9, and Guni, and Jezer, and\n Shallum\u00b2, the sons of Bilhah.\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xlvi. 24, _Jahzeel_.\n\n \u00b2 In Genesis xlvi. 24, _Shillem_.\n\n=13.= _Jahziel ... Shallum_] In Genesis _Jahzeel ... Shillem_.\n\n\n =14\u201219.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF MANASSEH.\n\nA difficult section. The text is much disturbed in verses 14, 15; and\nthere is hardly any material available for the illustration of verses\n16, 17.\n\n \u00b9\u2074The sons of Manasseh; Asriel, whom\u00b9 _his wife_ bare: (his\n concubine the Aramitess bare Machir the father of Gilead:\n\n \u00b9 Or, according to the Septuagint, _whom his concubine the\n Aramitess bare; she bare &c._\n\n=14.= _Asriel, whom_ his wife _bare_: (_his concubine the Aramitess\nbare_] Compare Numbers xxvi. 31. Probably, however, the name is due to\nan error of dittography. Read simply as margin, following LXX., =whom\nhis concubine the Aramitess bare=; =she bare=, etc.\n\n_his concubine the Aramitess_] The inhabitants of Gilead were thus in\npart Arameans (Syrians) by descent. A different tradition is preserved\nin Genesis 1. 23.\n\n \u00b9\u2075and Machir took a wife of\u00b9 Huppim and Shuppim, whose\u00b2 sister\u2019s\n name was Maacah;) and the name of the second was Zelophehad: and\n Zelophehad had daughters.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _and his_.\n\n=15.= _took a wife of Huppim and Shuppim_] i.e. allied himself by\nmarriage to these two families.\n\n_whose sister\u2019s name_] Render, =and his= (Machir\u2019s) =sister\u2019s name=.\nThe statement regarding Maacah is ethnographical, and means that the\npeople of Maacah (a district at the foot of Hermon) were related by\nblood to Machir (the Eastern Manassites).\n\n_Zelophehad had daughters_] Numbers xxvii. 1\u201211.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And Maacah the wife of Machir bare a son, and she called his\n name Peresh; and the name of his brother was Sheresh; and his\n sons were Ulam and Rakem.\n\n=16.= _wife of_] But in verse 15, Maacah is sister of Machir. The text\nof verses 15, 16 has probably suffered some disturbance.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And the sons of Ulam; Bedan. These were the sons of Gilead the\n son of Machir, the son of Manasseh.\n\n=17.= _the sons of Ulam_] Sons of Ulam are mentioned (viii. 40) among\nthe descendants of Benjamin: a variation in the tradition of their\ndescent.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And his sister Hammolecheth bare Ishhod, and Abiezer\u00b9, and\n Mahlah.\n\n \u00b9 In Numbers xxvi. 30, _Iezer_.\n\n=18.= _Abiezer_] Gideon\u2019s family; Judges vi. 11; compare Joshua xvii. 2.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And the sons of Shemida were Ahian, and Shechem, and Likhi,\n and Aniam.\n\n=19.= _Shechem_] This name represents the Israelite portion of the\ninhabitants of Shechem: the rest of the inhabitants were Hivites or\nCanaanites. See Judges ix.\n\n\n =20\u201227.=\n THE LINE OF EPHRAIM TO JOSHUA.\n\n=20\u201227.= The section presents several difficulties, arising either\nfrom the attempt to combine various threads of traditions or possibly\nfrom textual corruption. Note that Ezer and Elead, who in verse 21 are\nremoved by several generations from Ephraim, are in verse 22 f. treated\nas his immediate sons.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And the sons of Ephraim; Shuthelah, and Bered his son, and\n Tahath his son, and Eleadah his son, and Tahath his son,\n\n=20.= _Shuthelah ... Bered ... Tahath ... Eleadah_] These four names\nappear to correspond with _Shuthelah ... Becher ... Tahan ... Eran_ in\nNumbers xxvi. 35, 36.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9and Zabad his son, and Shuthelah his son, and Ezer, and Elead,\n whom the men of Gath that were born in the land slew, because\n they came down to take away their cattle.\n\n=21.= _the men of Gath that were born in the land_] i.e. the Philistine\npopulation.\n\n_they came down_] This phrase suits a descent from the hills of Ephraim\ninto the Philistine lowlands. The raid presumably took place after the\nperiod of the Exodus and the settlement of Israel in Canaan. Yet it is\nalso possible that the story should be classed with certain traditions\nwhich ignore the narrative of the Egyptian sojourn and the Exodus\u2015\u2015see\nCook, _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, s.v. _Genesis_, p. 584, col. 2.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Ephraim their father mourned many days, and his brethren\n came to comfort him.\n\n=22.= _And Ephraim their father_] i.e. the tribe, or district, to which\nthe clans, _Ezer_ and _Elead_, belonged.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And he went in to his wife, and she conceived, and bare a son,\n and he called his name Beriah, because it went evil with his\n house.\n\n=23.= _Beriah, because it went evil_] Hebrew =Beri\u2018ah because it\nwent ber\u0101\u2018ah=, a play on the sound of the name. This is a feature\ncharacteristic of the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, compare\nGenesis xxx. 11, etc. It is interesting to find it in the tradition\nupon which the Chronicler here depends. Compare also iv. 9 (note).\n\n \u00b2\u2074And his daughter was Sheerah, who built Beth-horon the nether\n and the upper, and Uzzen-sheerah. \u00b2\u2075And Rephah was his son, and\n Resheph, and Telah his son, and Tahan his son; \u00b2\u2076Ladan his son,\n Ammihud his son, Elishama his son; \u00b2\u2077Nun\u00b9 his son, Joshua his\n son.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Non_.\n\n=24.= _Beth-horon_] See vi. 68, note.\n\n\n =28, 29.=\n SETTLEMENTS OF THE SONS OF JOSEPH.\n\nThe writer of these verses does not intend to give a full list of the\nseats of Ephraim (verse 28) and Manasseh (verse 29); but apparently\nto indicate the area and position of their territory by the mention of\ntowns on the borders.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And their possessions and habitations were Beth-el and the\n towns\u00b9 thereof, and eastward Naaran\u00b2, and westward Gezer, with\n the towns thereof; Shechem also and the towns thereof, unto\n Azzah\u00b3 and the towns thereof:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _daughters_.\n\n \u00b2 In Joshua xvi. 7, _Naarah_.\n\n \u00b3 Many MSS. read, _Ayyah_.\n\n=28.= _Beth-el_] the southern boundary. Beth-el is the modern _Beit\u00een_,\nten miles north of Jerusalem (B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 217). The\ncity was on the border of Ephraim and Benjamin and in Joshua xviii.\n22 is assigned to Benjamin, but it was originally conquered by Ephraim\n(Judges i. 22), and during the division of the kingdom it belonged to\nthe North: compare 1 Kings xii. 29, 32; 2 Chronicles xiii. 19, note.\n\n_Naaran_] the eastern boundary. In Joshua xvi. 7, _Naarath_ (Revised\nVersion _Naarah_).\n\n_Gezer ... Shechem_] On Gezer the western, and Shechem the northern\nboundary\u2015\u2015see the note on vi. 67.\n\n_Azzah_] or _Ayyah_, has not yet been identified. Probably, like\nShechem, it serves to define the northern border between Ephraim and\nManasseh.\n\n \u00b2\u2079and by the borders of the children of Manasseh, Beth-shean and\n her towns, Taanach and her towns, Megiddo and her towns, Dor and\n her towns. In these dwelt the children of Joseph the son of\n Israel.\n\n=29.= For Manasseh four important towns are enumerated: Beth-shean on\nthe east in the valley of the Jordan, Taanach and Megiddo in the plain\nof Esdraelon or Megiddo, and Dor on the Mediterranean coast, south of\nMt Carmel.\n\n_Beth-shean_] In 1 Samuel xxxi. 10, 12 spelt Beth-shan. It is the Greek\n_Scythopolis_, the modern _Beisan_.\n\n_Taanach_] See vi. 70, note on _Aner_.\n\n_Megiddo_] Judges v. 19; 2 Kings xxiii. 29; Zechariah xii. 11.\n\n_Dor_] modern _Tantura_. Compare Joshua xvii. 11.\n\n\n =30\u201240.=\n THE GENEALOGY OF ASHER.\n\n \u00b3\u2070The sons of Asher; Imnah, and Ishvah, and Ishvi, and Beriah,\n and Serah their sister.\n\n=30.= _The sons of Asher_] The names in verses 30, 31 are derived from\nGenesis xlvi. 17 (compare Numbers xxvi. 44\u201246). There is no variation\nin the Hebrew spelling of the names, but _Ishvah_ is missing in Numbers\nEither Ishvah or Ishvi must be regarded as an error of dittography.\n\n_Beriah_] _Beriah_ is mentioned above, verse 23, as a clan of Ephraim,\nand appears also as a family of Benjamin, viii. 13, 16.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And the sons of Beriah; Heber, and Malchiel, who was the\n father of Birzaith. \u00b3\u00b2And Heber begat Japhlet, and Shomer\u00b9, and\n Hotham, and Shua their sister. \u00b3\u00b3And the sons of Japhlet; Pasach,\n and Bimhal, and Ashvath. These are the children of Japhlet.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 34, _Shemer_.\n\n=31.= _Heber, and Malchiel_] The antiquity of these two names seems\nto be attested by the mention of \u201cHabiri and Malchiel\u201d in the Amarna\ntablets (_circa_ 1400 B.C.).\n\n_Birzaith_] probably the name of a place, \u201cThe well of the olive-tree.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u2074And the sons of Shemer\u00b9; Ahi, and Rohgah, Jehubbah, and Aram.\n \u00b3\u2075And the sons\u00b2 of Helem his brother; Zophah, and Imna, and\n Shelesh, and Amal. \u00b3\u2076The sons of Zophah; Suah, and Harnepher,\n and Shual, and Beri, and Imrah; \u00b3\u2077Bezer, and Hod, and Shamma,\n and Shilshah, and Ithran, and Beera. \u00b3\u2078And the sons of Jether;\n Jephunneh, and Pispah, and Ara. \u00b3\u2079And the sons of Ulla; Arah,\n and Hanniel, and Rizia.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 32, _Shomer_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _son_.\n\n=34, 35.= _Shemer ... Helem_] Read perhaps =Shomer ... Hotham=, to\nagree with verse 32.\n\n \u2074\u2070All these were the children of Asher, heads of the fathers\u2019\n houses, choice and mighty men of valour, chief of the princes.\n And the number of them reckoned by genealogy for service in war\n was twenty and six thousand men.\n\n=40.= _twenty and six thousand_] In xii. 36 the men of war of Asher\nare reckoned at forty thousand (compare Numbers i. 41, xxvi. 47, where\nstill higher reckonings are given). The numbers here and in verses 5, 7,\n9, 11 (as well as in verse 2, which see) are perhaps supposed to refer\nto the time of David. The numbers may be based on family traditions,\nbut no important conclusions ought to be drawn from them.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n\n\n =1\u201240= (compare vii. 6\u201212).\n THE GENEALOGY OF BENJAMIN.\n\n=1\u201240.= Various indications combine to show that the names in this list\nreflect post-exilic conditions. It has generally been compared with\nthe \u201cBenjamite\u201d genealogy in vii. 6\u201212 which was supposed to express\nthe relationships and strength of the tribe at the time of David. If,\nhowever, according to the view adopted in this volume, the passage vii.\n6\u201212 is in reality a genealogy of Zebulun, comparison between it and\nthis list is futile. Such parallels as can justly be made between the\nnames in the two lists are due to the Benjamite colouring which has\nbeen imparted to vii. 6\u201212 after the initial error in vii. 6 turned the\n\u201csons of Zebulun\u201d into \u201cBenjamin.\u201d\n\nThis, the real genealogy of Benjamin, unfortunately presents not a few\nproblems for which as yet no convincing solution can be offered. The\ndifficulties are due in large measure to the corrupt state of the text\nin several verses: especially verses 6\u201214.\n\n \u00b9And Benjamin begat Bela his firstborn, Ashbel the second, and\n Aharah the third;\n\n=1.= _Benjamin begat ..._] Compare Genesis xlvi. 21.\n\n_firstborn_] = _Becher_ in Genesis xlvi. 21. In the unvocalised Hebrew\ntext the noun and proper name are represented by the same letters,\n_BKR_.\n\n_Ashbel_] literally \u201cman of Baal.\u201d Compare note on Eshbaal, verse 33.\n\n \u00b2Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth.\n\n=2.= _Nohah ... Huram_] the list is assuredly based on Genesis xlvi.\n21 and Numbers xxvi. 38\u201240, despite the surface divergences. Several\nof the changes are due to textual errors, e.g. Aharah and Ahoah are\nprobably both variants of Ahiram (Genesis xlvi. 21).\n\n \u00b3And Bela had sons, Addar\u00b9, and Gera, and Abihud; \u2074and Abishua,\n and Naaman, and Ahoah;\n\n \u00b9 In Genesis xlvi. 21, _Ard_.\n\n=3.= _Abihud_] read perhaps (a slight change in the Hebrew) =Gera,\nfather of Ehud=.\n\n \u2075and Gera, and Shephuphan\u00b9, and Huram.\n\n \u00b9 In Numbers xxvi. 39, _Shephupham_.\n\n=5.= _Shephuphan, and Huram_] See vii. 12, note on _Shuppim_.\n\n=6\u201228.= Apparently a list of five post-exilic families [Elpaal (verses\n11, 18), Beriah (verses 13, 16), Shema (verses 13, 21), Shashak (verses\n14, 25), and Jeroham (verses 14, 27)], whose genealogy seems to be\ntraced from Ehud, and whose descendants reside in Jerusalem (so verse\n28, but see note _ad loc._). The uncertainty on the former point is the\ninevitable consequence of the corrupt state of the text in verses 6\u201214.\n\n \u2076And these are the sons of Ehud; these are the heads of fathers\u2019\n _houses_ of the inhabitants of Geba, and they carried them\n captive to Manahath:\n\n=6.= _Ehud_] _Ehud_ (the deliverer of Israel from Moab) was descended\nfrom _Gera_ (verse 5; Judges iii. 15).\n\n_Geba_] Compare vi. 60.\n\n_they carried them captive_] an utterly obscure phrase, most probably\ndue to textual error. It is a plausible suggestion that the phrase is\na corruption of proper names commencing the list which we should expect\nto follow the preceding words: \u201c_these are the heads of_,\u201d etc. Hogg,\n_Jewish Quarterly Review_ xi. 102 ff., therefore conjectured the names\n\u201c=Iglaam and Alemoth=\u201d; and similarly in verse 7, in place of the\nequally obscure words \u201c_he carried them captive; and he_,\u201d he would\nread \u201c=and Iglaam begat=.\u201d\n\n \u2077and Naaman, and Ahijah, and Gera, he carried them captive; and\n he begat Uzza and Ahihud.\n\n=7.= _Naaman, and Ahijah, and Gera_] perhaps to be deleted, as a\nrepetition of verse 5.\n\n \u2078And Shaharaim begat children in the field of Moab, after he had\n sent\u00b9 them away; Hushim and Baara were his wives. \u2079And he begat\n of Hodesh his wife, Jobab, and Zibia, and Mesha, and Malcam;\n \u00b9\u2070and Jeuz, and Shachia, and Mirmah. These were his sons, heads\n of fathers\u2019 _houses_.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _sent away Hushim and Baara his wives_.\n\n=8, 9.= Again the Hebrew text appears to be in disorder, and the verses\nin consequence are so obscure that conjectures are all precarious.\n\n_Hushim_] is elsewhere the name of a man. Hence verse 11 below should\nperhaps read =And Hushim begat....=\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And of Hushim he begat Abitub and Elpaal.\n\n=11.= _Abitub_] no sons of his are recorded.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And the sons of Elpaal; Eber, and Misham, and Shemed, who\n built Ono and Lod, with the towns thereof:\n\n=12.= _sons of Elpaal_] Elpaal\u2019s sons are given also and more fully\nin verses 17, 18; and, as the three names in the present verse appear\nto be transcriptional variants of three mentioned in 17, 18, it is\nprobable that this verse is a marginal note which has crept into the\ntext.\n\n_who built Ono and Lod_] the subject is not _Shemed_, but _Elpaal_;\n\u201cbuilt,\u201d i.e. entered into possession of. Ono and Lod (= Lydda), some\nseven and eleven miles respectively south of Jaffa, are referred to in\nNehemiah vii. 35, xi. 35, and Ezra ii. 33. The Targum adds, _which the\nsons of Israel laid waste and burnt with fire, when they made war in\nGibeah with the tribe of Benjamin_.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and Beriah, and Shema, who were heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ of\n the inhabitants of Aijalon, who put to flight the inhabitants of\n Gath;\n\n=13.= _Aijalon_] compare Joshua x. 12. It was situated near the Jaffa\nroad, about thirteen miles from Jerusalem.\n\n_who put ... Gath_] an interesting remark, which should be compared\nwith vii. 21, 23\u2015\u2015note the name _Beriah_ in both passages. The relation\nof the two passages is, however, uncertain.\n\n \u00b9\u2074and Ahio, Shashak, and Jeremoth; \u00b9\u2075and Zebadiah, and Arad, and\n Eder; \u00b9\u2076and Michael, and Ishpah, and Joha, the sons of Beriah;\n \u00b9\u2077and Zebadiah, and Meshullam, and Hizki, and Heber; \u00b9\u2078and\n Ishmerai, and Izliah, and Jobab, the sons of Elpaal; \u00b9\u2079and Jakim,\n and Zichri, and Zabdi;\n\n=14.= _And Ahio, Shashak, and Jeremoth_] Read, following LXX., =And\ntheir brethren Shashak and Jeremoth=. The pronoun of course refers to\n_Beriah_ and _Shema_ (verse 13), and to _Abitub_ and _Elpaal_ (verse\n11)\u2015\u2015these four, with _Shashak_ and _Jeremoth_, being sons of _Hushim_,\nif verse 11 be emended and verses 12, 13 be regarded as a marginal\naddition, as is suggested above.\n\n \u00b2\u2070and Elienai and Zillethai, and Eliel;\n\n=20.= _Elienai_] Read, perhaps, _Elioenai_, a name meaning \u201cMy eyes\nlook towards Jehovah,\u201d compare iii. 23.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9and Adaiah, and Beraiah, and Shimrath, the sons of Shimei\u00b9;\n \u00b2\u00b2and Ishpan, and Eber, and Eliel; \u00b2\u00b3and Abdon, and Zichri, and\n Hanan;\n\n \u00b9 In verse 13, _Shema_.\n\n=21.= _Shimei_] = _Shema_ (verse 13).\n\n \u00b2\u2074and Hananiah, and Elam, and Anthothijah; \u00b2\u2075and Iphdeiah, and\n Penuel, the sons of Shashak; \u00b2\u2076and Shamsherai, and Shehariah,\n and Athaliah;\n\n=24.= _Anthothijah_] The name is a trace of an ancient Egyptian\nwar-goddess _\u2018Anath_, apparently associated with Jehovah in the Jewish\ntemple at Elephantine (see _\u2018Anath-bethel_ in the papyri). Compare also\n_Anathoth_ near Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b2\u2077and Jaareshiah, and Elijah, and Zichri, the sons of Jeroham.\n\n=27.= _Jeroham_] = Jeremoth (verse 14).\n\n \u00b2\u2078These were heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ throughout their\n generations, chief men: these dwelt in Jerusalem.\n\n=28.= _these dwelt in Jerusalem_] i.e. in the writer\u2019s day the heads of\nfamilies enumerated in verses 15\u201227 dwelt in Jerusalem. Compare ix. 2,\n3; Nehemiah xi. 1\u20128. But the words may be a gloss brought in from ix.\n34 along with the following verses (see below).\n\n\n =29\u201238= (= chapter ix. 35\u201244).\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL.\n\n=29\u201238.= These verses, which set forth the ancestors and descendants of\nSaul, are found also in ix. 35\u201244, where they serve as the introduction\nto the account of Saul\u2019s death in ch. x. The latter passage would\nnaturally seem to be the original place of these verses, but the\narguments in favour of that view are not conclusive, and the point must\nbe allowed to be doubtful.\n\n \u00b2\u2079And in Gibeon there dwelt the father of Gibeon, _Jeiel_, whose\n wife\u2019s name was Maacah:\n\n=29.= _Gibeon_] some six miles north of Jerusalem, was apparently the\nresidence in post-exilic days of families which claimed descent from\nthe house of Saul. Compare 2 Chronicles i. 3.\n\n_Jeiel_] added in accordance with ix. 35.\n\n \u00b3\u2070and his firstborn son Abdon, and Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and\n Nadab;\n\n=30.= _and Baal_] Add with LXX. (A) and ix. 36 =and Ner=. LXX. (B)\nshows that a word is missing after _Baal_ for it reads \u0392\u03b1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\n(= \u0392\u03b1\u1f70\u03bb \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039d....?).\n\n \u00b3\u00b9and Gedor, and Ahio, and Zecher\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 37, _Zechariah_.\n\n=31.= _and Zecher_] Read with ix. 37, =and Zechariah, and Mikloth=.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And Mikloth begat Shimeah\u00b9. And they also dwelt with their\n brethren in Jerusalem, over against their brethren.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 38, _Shimeam_.\n\n=32.= _with their brethren_, etc.] i.e. with some of their brethren\nin Jerusalem over against other of their brethren in Gibeon and other\nplaces. \u201cThey\u201d would seem to refer to _Mikloth_ and _Shimeah_, but the\nclause is far from clear, and it may be noted that verse 32b looks like\nthe heading of a list that has been lost.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And Ner begat Kish; and Kish begat Saul; and Saul begat\n Jonathan, and Malchi-shua, and Abinadab\u00b9, and Eshbaal\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Samuel xiv. 49, _Ishvi_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Samuel ii. 8, _Ishbosheth_.\n\n=33.= _begat Kish_] here and in ix. 39, read =begat Abner=\u2015\u2015as in 1\nSamuel xiv. 51, etc.\n\n_Jonathan ... Abinadab_] Slain with Saul on Mt Gilboa; x. 2; 1 Samuel\nxxxi. 2.\n\n_Eshbaal_] In 2 Samuel ii. 8 called _Ish-bosheth_. In the (more\ngenerally read) Samuel text the offensive name _Eshbaal_, \u201cMan (i.e.\nworshipper) of Baal,\u201d has been changed to _Ishbosheth_, \u201cMan of the\nShameful-thing\u201d (i.e. of the idol), but it has been left standing\nin the less-used text of Chronicles The title _Baal_ (\u201cLord\u201d) was\napplied in early days (e.g. in the days of Saul) to the national God\nof Israel, but in later days the prophets objected to it because of\nits general use in designation of the heathen gods also. Hosea (ii.\n17), for example, declares that the true worshippers of Jehovah must no\nlonger call him \u201cMy Baal\u201d (_Baali_). Thus to Saul and Samuel the name\n_Eshbaal_ was acceptable as meaning \u201cMan of the Lord,\u201d i.e. of Jehovah,\nbut to the late reviser of the book of Samuel it was offensive as\nsignifying \u201cMan of Baal,\u201d i.e. of one of the gods worshipped by the old\nCanaanite peoples or by the neighbouring nations. Since the text of\nChronicles has retained such forms as Eshbaal (here), Ashbel (verse 1),\nit seems that the conscientious alterations of such forms in the books\nof Samuel, Kings, etc., are later than the time of the Chronicler.\n\n \u00b3\u2074And the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal\u00b9; and Merib-baal begat\n Micah.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel iv. 4, ix. 6, 10, _Mephibosheth_.\n\n=34.= _Merib-baal_] A name meaning \u201cBaal pleadeth\u201d; in chapter ix. 40b\n(Hebrew) it is written _Meri-baal_, i.e. \u201cMan of Baal.\u201d The person\nmeant seems to be _Mephibosheth_ (2 Samuel ix. 6, 12).\n\n \u00b3\u2075And the sons of Micah; Pithon, and Melech, and Tarea\u00b9, and\n Ahaz.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 41, _Tahrea_.\n\n=35.= _Tarea_] In ix. 41, _Tahrea_.\n\n \u00b3\u2076And Ahaz begat Jehoaddah\u00b9; and Jehoaddah begat Alemeth, and\n Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat Moza:\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 42, _Jarah_.\n\n=36.= _Jehoaddah_] In ix. 42, _Jarah_.\n\n \u00b3\u2077and Moza begat Binea; Raphah\u00b9 was his son, Eleasah his son,\n Azel his son: \u00b3\u2078and Azel had six sons, whose names are these;\n Azrikam, Bocheru, and Ishmael, and Sheariah, and Obadiah, and\n Hanan. All these were the sons of Azel. \u00b3\u2079And the sons of Eshek\n his brother; Ulam his firstborn, Jeush the second, and Eliphelet\n the third. \u2074\u2070And the sons of Ulam were mighty men of valour,\n archers, and had many sons, and sons\u2019 sons, an hundred and fifty.\n All these were of the sons of Benjamin.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter ix. 43, _Rephaiah_.\n\n=37.= _Raphah_] In ix. 43, _Rephaiah_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n\n\n =1\u201217= (compare Nehemiah xi. 1\u201219).\n THE HEADS OF THE FAMILIES WHICH DWELT IN JERUSALEM.\n\nVerses 2\u201217 contain the lists of the heads of families of Judah\n(=3\u20126=), of Benjamin (=7\u20129=), of the priests (=10\u201213=), of the Levites\n(= 14\u201216=), and of the porters (=17=), who dwelt in Jerusalem at some\nperiod after the Return (compare note on verse 2). A similar list (with\nsome variations which are recorded in their places in the following\nnotes) occurs in Nehemiah xi. 3\u201219. The partial agreement coupled with\nthe partial divergence of the two lists may be explained by supposing\nthat both are extracts independently made from the same document, and\nhave been inserted, one in Chronicles, the other in Nehemiah, lest\nthe peculiarities of either list should be lost. We may conclude from\nNehemiah xi. 1, 2 that both lists represent the population of Jerusalem,\nafter Nehemiah had taken measures for increasing it. Another way of\naccounting for the divergences in the two lists is to suppose that the\npresent list represents the Jerusalem of a later period than the list\nin Nehemiah See also verse 17.\n\n \u00b9So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they\n are written in the book of the kings of Israel: and Judah was\n carried away captive to Babylon for their transgression.\n\n=1.= _in the book of the kings of Israel_] See Introduction \u00a7\u00a05, B\u00a0(3).\nThe LXX., however, reads \u201cin the book of the kings of Israel _and\nJudah_.\u201d With the LXX. reading, _all Israel_ must be taken as subject\nof the verb _was carried away_, but of course the phrase must still be\ntaken as meaning an \u201cIsrael\u201d = Judah.\n\n \u00b2Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in\n their cities were, Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the\n Nethinim.\n\n=2.= _the first inhabitants_] It has been thought that the word\n\u201cfirst\u201d here refers to _pre-eminence_ (compare Nehemiah xi. 3), and\nthat the list which follows (verses 4 ff.) is a list of _chief men_.\nIt is better, however, to take \u201cfirst\u201d in a temporal sense, meaning\n\u201cpre-exilic,\u201d and to suppose that the Chronicler or whoever placed\nthis chapter here mistakenly imagined this list to be a pre-exilic\nregister. That it is not really pre-exilic is certain by reason of\nits vital connection with the post-exilic list in Nehemiah xi. 3\u201219.\nThe suggestion that the resemblances are due to the continuity\nof population in Jerusalem before and after the exile is utterly\nimprobable.\n\n_in their cities_] The phrase is apparently an abridgment of words in\nNehemiah xi. 3, and is really meaningless in the present context. In\nNehemiah it signifies \u201ctownships in Judah\u201d where certain persons, who\nnow elected to dwell in Jerusalem, had formerly resided.\n\n_Israel_] i.e. laymen as distinguished from men of Levitical descent.\nAccording to verse 3 _Israel_ included at least Judah, Benjamin,\nEphraim, and Manasseh (compare Psalms lxxx. 2, where Judah\u2015\u2015the\nspeaker\u2015\u2015associates Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh with herself in\nher appeal to the God of _Israel_, See also note on 2 Chronicles xxx.\n18). This is a totally different usage from that of earlier times,\nwhen _Israel_ meant the Northern kingdom, and _Judah_ the Southern.\n\n_Nethinim_] These were a class of Temple servants reckoned as inferior\nto the Levites. Perhaps they were of foreign extraction and included\nthe Gibeonites (compare Joshua ix. 23). They are mentioned nowhere else\nin the Old Testament except in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.\n\n \u00b3And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the\n children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim and\n Manasseh;\n\n=3.= _of Ephraim and Manasseh_] See note on 2 Chronicles xxx. 18.\n\n\n =4\u20126= (compare Nehemiah xi. 4\u20126).\n THE SONS OF JUDAH.\n\n \u2074Uthai the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the\n son of Bani, of the children of Perez the son of Judah.\n\n=4.= _Uthai_] In Nehemiah _Athaiah_. The two words are more alike in\nHebrew than in English and are perhaps various readings of one name.\n\n_Perez_] compare ii. 4, 5. We have here (verses 4\u20126) a threefold\ndivision of the tribe of Judah into the descendants of Perez, Shelah,\nand Zerah, just as in Numbers xxvi. 20.\n\n \u2075And of the Shilonites; Asaiah the firstborn, and his sons.\n\n=5.= _Shilonites_] Or _Shelanites_ as Numbers xxvi. 20; they were\ndescendants of Shelah, who is mentioned as a son of Judah in ii. 3.\nFor other descendants, see iv. 21 f., and Nehemiah xi. 5.\n\n_Asaiah_] In Nehemiah xi. 5 _Maaseiah_, a kindred name.\n\n \u2076And of the sons of Zerah; Jeuel, and their brethren, six\n hundred and ninety.\n\n=6.= _Jeuel_] In Nehemiah xi. 5 the \u201csons of Zerah\u201d are missing.\n\n_six hundred and ninety_] Compare Nehemiah xi. 6 (_four hundred\nthreescore and eight_ sons of _Perez_) where _Perez_ may be an error\nfor _Zerah_.\n\n\n =7\u20129= (compare Nehemiah xi. 7\u20129).\n THE SONS OF BENJAMIN.\n\n \u2077And of the sons of Benjamin; Sallu the son of Meshullam, the\n son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah;\n\n=7.= _Sallu_] His genealogy is differently stated in Nehemiah xi. 7,\nbut see next note.\n\n_the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah_] Read perhaps =Judah, the\nson of Hassenuah= (compare Nehemiah xi. 9). _Hodaviah_ and _Judah_\ncould easily be confused in Hebrew.\n\n \u2078and Ibneiah the son of Jeroham, and Elah the son of Uzzi, the\n son of Michri, and Meshullam the son of Shephatiah, the son of\n Reuel, the son of Ibnijah;\n\n=8.= _Ibneiah, Elah, Meshullam_] Not mentioned in Nehemiah xi.\n\n \u2079and their brethren, according to their generations, nine\n hundred and fifty and six. All these men were heads of fathers\u2019\n _houses_ by their fathers\u2019 houses.\n\n=9.= _nine hundred and fifty and six_] 928 in Nehemiah xi. 8.\n\n\n =10\u201213= (compare Nehemiah xi. 10\u201214).\n THE PRIESTS.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And of the priests; Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin;\n\n=10.= _Jehoiarib_] Spelt _Joiarib_ in Nehemiah xi. 10. _Jehoiarib_ and\n_Jedaiah_ occur as names of the first and second courses of the priests\nin xxiv. 7; Nehemiah xii. 6, 19. The Maccabees were of the course of\nJoarib (= Jehoiarib); 1 Maccabees ii. 1.\n\n_Jachin_] The name of the twenty-first course; xxiv. 17.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9and Azariah\u00b9 the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son\n of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, the ruler of\n the house of God;\n\n \u00b9 In Nehemiah xi. 11, _Seraiah_.\n\n=11.= _Azariah_] In Nehemiah xi. 11, _Seraiah_.\n\n_the ruler of the house of God_] This title could perhaps be borne by\nthe high-priest (2 Chronicles xxxi. 10, 13), but in any case it was not\nconfined to him (2 Chronicles xxxv. 8, where several such \u201crulers\u201d are\nmentioned; compare also Jeremiah xx. 1; Acts iv. 1).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2and Adaiah the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashhur, the son of\n Malchijah, and Maasai the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the\n son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer;\n\n=12.= _Malchijah_] The name of the fifth course; xxiv. 9.\n\n_Maasai_] The reading of Nehemiah xi. 13 _Amashsai_ is corrupt. The\nform given in Chronicles is open to suspicion. Probably the true\nreading is lost.\n\n_Adiel_] In Nehemiah _Azareel_.\n\n_Immer_] The name of the sixteenth course; xxiv. 14.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and their brethren, heads of their fathers\u2019 houses, a thousand\n and seven hundred and threescore; very able men for the work of\n the service of the house of God.\n\n=13.= _a thousand and seven hundred and threescore_] Only the five\n\u201ccourses\u201d of priests mentioned above (viz. Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, and\nJachin, verse 10, and Malchijah and Immer, verse 12) seem to be\nincluded in this reckoning. Some commentators, however, regard Azariah\n(= Seraiah) in verse 11 as the name of a new course, which took the\nplace of one of the courses reckoned in xxiv. 7\u201218. If this be right we\nhave here the sum of _six_ courses.\n\nIn Nehemiah xi. 12\u201214 the number of the priests is given on a different\nplan; _eight hundred and twenty-two_ \u201cdid the work of the house\u201d; _two\nhundred and forty-two_ were \u201cchiefs of fathers\u2019 houses\u201d; _an hundred\nand twenty-eight_ were \u201cmighty men of valour.\u201d The total falls far\nshort of the _thousand and seven hundred and threescore_ of Chronicles\nWe have not sufficient data on which to base any explanation of the\ndifferent totals.\n\n_very able men_] The Hebrew is the same as in Nehemiah xi. 14 and is\nusually rendered _mighty men of valour_. The sense, however, is no\ndoubt correctly given by Revised Version _very able_, or _efficient_.\nCompare 2 Chronicles xxvi. 17.\n\n\n =14\u201216= (compare Nehemiah xi. 15\u201218).\n THE LEVITES.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And of the Levites; Shemaiah the son of Hasshub, the son of\n Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari;\n\n=14.= _of the sons of Merari_] In Nehemiah _the sons of Bunni_, which\nis probably a corruption of the reading of Chronicles Otherwise of the\nthree great Levitical families, Merari, Asaph, and Jeduthun, mentioned\nhere, only the last two appear in Nehemiah.\n\n \u00b9\u2075and Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah the son of\n Mica, the son of Zichri\u00b9, the son of Asaph;\n\n \u00b9 In Nehemiah xi. 17, _Zabdi_.\n\n=15.= _Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal_] The reading appears to be corrupt,\nfor the analogy of the latter half of the verse as well as of verses 14,\n16 leads us to expect something more than bare names. Neither the LXX.\nnor the Vulgate gives any real help for emending the clause. The\ncorresponding words in Nehemiah (xi. 17) are _Bakbukiah the second\namong his brethren_.\n\n \u00b9\u2076and Obadiah\u00b2 the son of Shemaiah\u00b3, the son of Galal, the son\n of Jeduthun, and Berechiah the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah,\n that dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites.\n\n \u00b2 In Nehemiah xi. 17, _Abda_.\n\n \u00b3 In Nehemiah xi. 17, _Shammua_.\n\n=16.= _Obadiah the son of Shemaiah_] In Nehemiah _Abda the son of\nShammua_. Which was the reading of the original document cannot be\ndetermined.\n\n_Jeduthun_] See note on xvi. 41.\n\n_Berechiah the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah_] Not mentioned in\nNehemiah He probably represented the Kohathite division of the singers;\ncompare vi. 33\u201238 (18\u201223 _Hebrew_), where the name _Elkanah_ occurs\nseveral times in the genealogy of the Kohathites.\n\n_the villages of the Netophathites_] Compare Nehemiah xii. 28, 29\n(Revised Version), whence it appears that these villages were close to\nJerusalem. The exact site is uncertain.\n\n\n =17\u201227= (compare Nehemiah xi. 19; 1 Chronicles xxvi. 1\u201219).\n ORGANISATION AND DUTIES OF THE PORTERS (DOORKEEPERS).\n\n=17\u201227.= The same subject is treated in xxvi. 1\u201219, and this fact has\nbeen urged as an argument for the view that chapter ix. is an addition\nto the Chronicler\u2019s work (see Introduction p. xxiii). But it is also\nreasonable to suppose that the Chronicler would here give a register\nof inhabitants of Jerusalem (which could not be included in the list of\nthe separate tribes), and such a register would probably give a survey\nof the Levitical classes.\n\nThe verses present on analysis several confusing features, see notes on\nverses 17, 22, 25, 33.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And the porters; Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman,\n and their brethren: Shallum was the chief;\n\n=17.= _And the porters_] Render, =doorkeepers= as in xvi. 38 and xxvi.\n1. In Solomon\u2019s Temple there were \u201ckeepers of the threshold,\u201d three in\nnumber (2 Kings xxv. 18), priests in rank (2 Kings xii. 9).\n\nA distinction between the doorkeepers and the Levites (verse 14) seems\nto be implied, but in verses 19, 26 the doorkeepers, or at any rate\ntheir leaders, are called Levites (compare Nehemiah xi. 15, 19 with\n1 Chronicles xxvi.). The supposed distinction may have died out before\nthe Chronicler\u2019s period, or perhaps earlier and later stages are\nreflected in the chapter (see also the note on verse 26).\n\n_Shallum...Ahiman_] These two names are absent from Nehemiah xi. 19\ntogether with the clause _Shallum was the chief_. This omission of all\nreference to Shallum must be accidental.\n\n_Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon_] The three names represent families,\nnot individuals; compare Ezra ii. 42 = Nehemiah vii. 45, where the\nfuller form is given, _the children of Shallum, ... the children of\nTalmon, the children of Akkub...._ These names persist in the five\nlists of porters which refer to post-exilic times; Ezra ii. 42 =\nNehemiah vii. 45; Nehemiah xi. 19 = 1 Chronicles ix. 17 (_Shallum_\nis to be supplied in Nehemiah from Chronicles); Nehemiah xii. 5\n(_Meshullam_ = _Shallum_). For the Chronicler\u2019s traditions of Levites,\nsingers, and doorkeepers of the Davidic period, see chapters xv.,\nxxiv. ff.\n\n_Ahiman_] Elsewhere in the Old Testament this name occurs only among\nthe names of the sons of Anak, and it is probable that the Chronicler\n(or some scribe) made here an error of transcription, and that AHIMAN\nhas arisen from the word AHEIHEM \u201ctheir brethren\u201d which follows. A\nfourth name was probably given in the original text, for see verse 26.\n\n \u00b9\u2078who hitherto _waited_ in the king\u2019s gate eastward: they were\n the porters for the camp of the children of Levi.\n\n=18.= _who_] i.e. _Shallum_ (verse 17), called _Shelemiah_ in xxvi. 14\n(= Meshelemiah, xxvi. verse 1). As mentioned above, a family is meant.\n\n_hitherto_] i.e. to the time of the Chronicler.\n\n_the king\u2019s gate eastward_] That the king had an entrance into the\nTemple named after him appears from 2 Kings xvi. 18, and that this gate\nwas on the east from Ezekiel xlvi. 1, 2.\n\n_for the camp of the children of Levi_] i.e. the Temple; but the phrase,\nwhich is derived from Numbers ii. 17, in its original context of course\nsignifies the Tabernacle of the Mosaic period. Doubtless it is used\nwith the implication that the institution of the gatekeepers dated back\nto that age: compare verse 19 _ad fin._, and contrast verse 22.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of\n Korah, and his brethren, of his father\u2019s house, the Korahites,\n were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates\u00b9 of the\n tabernacle\u00b2: and their fathers had been over the camp of the\n LORD, keepers of the entry;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _thresholds_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Tent_.\n\n=19.= _over the camp of the LORD, keepers_] We might expect the\nreference to the Temple or Tabernacle to be continued; but, as nothing\nis said in the Pentateuch of \u201ckeepers of the entry _to the tabernacle_,\u201d\nprobably the entry _to the camp_, not to the tabernacle, is meant\nin the present phrase. With this view agrees the mention of Phinehas\n(verse 20), for it apparently was the profanation of the camp in\ngeneral, not of the tabernacle, which Phinehas avenged (Numbers xxv.\n6\u20128), thus earning a blessing (Numbers xxv. 11\u201213).\n\n \u00b2\u2070and Phinehas the son of Eleazar was ruler over them in time\n past, _and_ the LORD was with him.\n\n=20.= and _the LORD was with him_] Render, =May the Lord be with him=,\na pious exclamation, customary on mentioning the name of a famous\nand righteous person deceased. The phrase is common in later Jewish\nliterature; but this passage seems to be the earliest instance of its\nuse.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was porter of the door of the\n tent of meeting. All these which were chosen to be porters in\n the gates\u00b9 were two hundred and twelve.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _thresholds_.\n\n=21.= _Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah_] Compare xxvi. 2, 14,\naccording to which Zechariah\u2019s watch was on the north.\n\n_the tent of meeting_] The reference would be to the Mosaic tent, if\nthe verse be taken, as is natural, in close connection with verses\n19, 20. If the verse be treated in conjunction with verse 22 it must\nrefer to the tent of the ark in David\u2019s time. The ambiguity is perhaps\nintentional.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2These were reckoned by genealogy in their villages, whom David\n and Samuel the seer did ordain in their set\u00b9 office.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _trust_.\n\n=22.= _All these_] Compare Ezra ii. 42 (= Nehemiah vii. 45); Nehemiah\nxi. 19. The discrepancy in numbers between Chronicles and Nehemiah\nand also between Nehemiah vii. and Nehemiah xi. may be explained by\nsupposing some difference in the manner of reckoning or some difference\nin the period referred to.\n\n_in their villages_] Compare verses 16 and 25.\n\n_whom David ... did ordain_] The Chronicler attributes to David the\norganisation of the priests (xxiv. 3), of the Levites (xxiii. 27;\nxxiv. 31), of the singers (xxv. 1 ff.), and of the doorkeepers (in\nthis passage). It has been thought that this verse is at variance with\nverses 18, 19, where the Mosaic origin of the gatekeepers seems to be\nimplied. But in answer it may be said that the Chronicler is guilty of\nno inconsistency in ascribing the _origin_ of the doorkeepers to the\nMosaic period and saying here that David and Samuel \u201cordained them in\ntheir set office,\u201d for the phrase refers, not to their origin, but to\ntheir _organisation_. For another suggestion see below on verse 26.\n\n_Samuel_] The association of Samuel with the organisation of\nthe sanctuary is confined to this passage, and is a significant\nillustration of the working of late Jewish thought, which was little\nconcerned with historic probability and much with edification. The\ntradition has probably arisen from the remark in 1 Samuel iii. 15,\nthat Samuel \u201copened the doors of the house of the Lord.\u201d As Samuel died\nbefore the reign of David, the Chronicler doubtless does not intend\nto represent him as contemporary with David in the organisation of the\nTemple, but probably supposes that Samuel\u2019s work was done in connection\nwith the tent, which according to the Chronicler was located in Gibeon\n(2 Chronicles i. 3).\n\n_the seer_] For the title, xxvi. 28, xxix. 29; 1 Samuel ix. 9; and\ncompare 2 Chronicles xvi. 7.\n\n_in their set office_] or _in their trust_; i.e. in their responsible\npositions.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of\n the house of the LORD, even the house of the tabernacle\u00b9, by\n wards.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Tent_.\n\n=23.= _the house of the tabernacle_] margin _Tent_. The phrase\ndesignates the period before the building of the Temple.\n\n \u00b2\u2074On\u00b9 the four sides were the porters, toward the east, west,\n north, and south.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Towards the four winds_.\n\n=24.= _On the four sides_] Fuller details are given in xxvi. 14\u201218.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And their brethren, in their villages, were to come in every\n seven days from time to time to be with them:\n\n=25.= _in their villages_] No special villages inhabited by porters are\nmentioned, but perhaps porters as well as singers dwelt in the\n\u201cvillages of the Netophathites\u201d (verse 16; Nehemiah xii. 28, Revised\nVersion).\n\n \u00b2\u2076for the four chief porters, who were Levites, were in a set\n office, and were over the chambers and over the treasuries in\n the house of God. \u00b2\u2077And they lodged round about the house of\n God, because the charge _thereof_ was upon them, and to them\n pertained the opening thereof morning by morning.\n\n=26.= _the four chief porters, who were Levites_] It seems clear from\nthis verse (and from the structure of the chapter, compare verses 10,\n14, 17\u2015\u2015as is pointed out in the note on verse 17) that the doorkeepers\nwere not, as a body, Levites; and according to verse 25 they dwelt\noutside Jerusalem, whilst their leaders (verse 27) were within the city.\nPerhaps this distinction between the leaders and the rank and file\ncould be used to explain the supposed inconsistency (if any exists\u2015\u2015see\nabove verse 22, note on _whom David ..._) between verses 19 and 22,\nas regards the tradition of origin: it might be said that whilst the\nleaders claimed that their office dated from the time of Moses (verse\n19), the rank and file traced their institution to David (verse 22).\n(In 2 Chronicles xxxiv. 9 Levites appear exercising the duties of\ndoorkeepers, but this does not prove that all doorkeepers were Levites.)\n\n_chambers_] i.e. store-chambers in which tithes and sacred vessels\nwere kept; compare 2 Chronicles xxxi. 5, 11, 12; Nehemiah xiii. 4\u20129: in\nverse 33 of this chapter they seem to be in use also as rooms in which\nLevites could dwell. The chambers were probably built as outbuildings\nround the Court of the Temple; compare xxiii. 28, xxviii. 12.\n\n\n =28, 29.=\n DUTIES OF THE LEVITES.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And certain of them had charge of the vessels of service; for\n by tale were they brought in and by tale were they taken out.\n\n=28.= _And certain of them_] The reference is to the Levites. The\ncontents of verses 28, 29 clearly refer to Levitical duties (compare\nxxiii. 29), and the transition from porters to Levites is made easier\nby the fact that the four porters last mentioned (verses 26, 27) are\nLevites. Some commentators hold that the paragraph dealing with the\nduties of the Levites begins in verse 26 with the words \u201c_And they were\nover_,\u201d etc.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Some of them also were appointed over the furniture, and over\n all the vessels of the sanctuary, and over the fine flour, and\n the wine, and the oil, and the frankincense, and the spices.\n\n=29.= compare xxiii. 29.\n\n\n =30.=\n A PRIESTLY DUTY.\n\n \u00b3\u2070And some of the sons of the priests prepared the confection of\n the spices.\n\n=30.= _the sons of the priests_] i.e. \u201cmembers of the priesthood,\npriests.\u201d Compare 2 Chronicles xxv. 13, \u201cthe soldiers of the army\u201d\n(literally \u201cthe sons of the troop\u201d) and the common expression \u201cthe sons\nof the prophets.\u201d\n\n_confection_] (For the word, compare 1 Samuel viii. 13, Revised Version\ntext and margin) This \u201cointment\u201d was peculiarly holy (Exodus xxx.\n23\u201225). The Levites might have charge of the oil and spices (verse 29),\nbut only the priests might make the confection.\n\n\n =31, 32.=\n OTHER LEVITICAL DUTIES.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And Mattithiah, one of the Levites, who was the firstborn of\n Shallum the Korahite, had the set office over the things that\n were baked in pans.\n\n=31.= _who was the firstborn of Shallum_] In xxvi. 2 the firstborn of\nMeshelemiah (= Shallum) is called _Zechariah_. Probably _Mattithiah_\nand _Zechariah_ represent _each_ a household belonging to an elder\nbranch of the great family of _Shallum_.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And some of their brethren, of the sons of the Kohathites,\n were over the shewbread, to prepare it every sabbath.\n\n=32.= _the shewbread_] Literally _the bread of the Row_ (or _of the\nPile_), for it had to be arranged in order before the Lord (Leviticus\nxxiv. 6). The Chronicler prefers this term to the older \u201cBread of the\nPresence\u201d (i.e. of Jehovah). See more fully Driver, _Exodus_, pp. 274,\n275, in this series.\n\n_to prepare it every sabbath_] \u201cEvery sabbath he shall set it in order\nbefore the LORD continually\u201d (Leviticus xxiv. 8). In 2 Chronicles ii. 4\n(= ii. 3, _Hebrew_) it is called _the continual shewbread_ (literally\n\u201cthe continual Row\u201d).\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And these are the singers, heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ of\n the Levites, _who dwelt_ in the chambers _and were_ free _from\n other service_: for they were employed in their work day and\n night. \u00b3\u2074These were heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ of the Levites,\n throughout their generations, chief men: these dwelt at\n Jerusalem.\n\n=33.= _And these are_] This verse may be intended as a conclusion to\nverses 15, 16, for the names there given are those of singers; compare\nNehemiah xi. 17. On the other hand it may have been intended as the\nheading of such a list as appears in vi. 33\u201247 (= 18\u201232, Hebrew), the\nlist itself having somehow been omitted.\n\n_day and night_] Compare Psalms cxxxiv. 1; Revelation iv. 8.\n\n\n =35\u201244= (= viii. 29\u201238).\n THE GENEALOGY OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL.\n\n \u00b3\u2075And in Gibeon there dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jeiel, whose\n wife\u2019s name was Maacah: \u00b3\u2076and his firstborn son Abdon, and Zur,\n and Kish, and Baal, and Ner, and Nadab; \u00b3\u2077and Gedor, and Ahio,\n and Zechariah, and Mikloth. \u00b3\u2078And Mikloth begat Shimeam. And\n they also dwelt with their brethren in Jerusalem, over against\n their brethren. \u00b3\u2079And Ner begat Kish; and Kish begat Saul; and\n Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchi-shua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal.\n \u2074\u2070And the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal; and Merib-baal begat\n Micah. \u2074\u00b9And the sons of Micah; Pithon, and Melech, and Tahrea,\n _and Ahaz_. \u2074\u00b2And Ahaz begat Jarah; and Jarah begat Alemeth,\n and Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat Moza: \u2074\u00b3and Moza begat\n Binea; and Rephaiah his son, Eleasah his son, Azel his son:\n \u2074\u2074and Azel had six sons, whose names are these; Azrikam, Bocheru,\n and Ishmael, and Sheariah, and Obadiah, and Hanan: these were\n the sons of Azel.\n\nSee notes on viii. 29 ff. The passage serves here as an introduction to\nthe story of the death of Saul. Whether it is in its original setting\nhere or in viii. 29 ff., or possibly is original in both chapters,\nthere is not sufficient evidence to determine (see note on viii. 29).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS X.\u2012XXIX.\n THE REIGN OF DAVID.\n\n\nAt this point the Chronicler begins his narrative of Israel\u2019s history.\nIt commences abruptly with an account of the defeat and death of Saul,\nwhich however is given not for its own interest, but to serve as a\nbrief introduction to the reign of David (chapter xi. ff.). Why does\nthe Chronicler choose to begin his narrative at this point, passing\nover in silence (a)\u00a0the Mosaic period, (b)\u00a0the stories of Judges and of\n1 Samuel i.\u2012xxx.? As regards (a) his silence is due to the assumption\nthat those for whom he writes are no less familiar than he is himself\nwith the account of the Mosaic age as presented by the fully developed\ntradition of the Pentateuch. As for (b), his silence probably arises\nneither from the difficulty of retelling the narratives of Judges\nin accordance with his theory of the early history, nor yet from the\nfact that they were doubtless familiar to his readers; but, again,\nfrom a consideration of the central purpose of his work. His theme\nis the Divine guidance of Israel\u2019s destiny, and, since that destiny\nhad ultimately centred upon the fortunes of Jerusalem and the worship\nmaintained through its Temple, all else in Israel\u2019s history becomes\nof quite secondary importance. He begins therefore where (for Israel)\nJerusalem and the Temple began\u2015\u2015with David, who conquered the city and\nplanned the Temple. The tales of the Judges, of Samuel, and of David\u2019s\nearly life and his magnanimity toward Saul (a tempting source for the\nexaltation of the character of the ideal king), all these are logically\nignored, since they lie outside the scope of the Chronicler\u2019s design.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n\n\n =1\u201212= (= 1 Samuel xxxi. 1\u201213).\n THE DEFEAT, DEATH, AND BURIAL OF SAUL.\n\n=1\u201212.= There are several variations between the text given here and\nthe text of 1 Samuel, to which attention will be called in the notes\nbelow.\n\n \u00b9Now the Philistines fought against Israel: and the men of\n Israel fled from before the Philistines, and fell down slain\u00b9 in\n mount Gilboa.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _wounded_.\n\n=1.= _in mount Gilboa_] In the campaign of Gilboa the Philistines\nshowed new and skilful strategy. Instead of at once marching eastward\nup the ravines which lead into Judah and Benjamin\u2015\u2015in which there was\nno room for their chariots (2 Samuel i. 6) to man\u0153uvre\u2015\u2015they first\nmarched northward along the sea-coast and then turned eastward just\nbefore reaching Mount Carmel. This movement brought them into the great\nfertile plain watered by the Kishon, ground over which chariots could\nact with decisive effect. At the north-east end of the plain rose the\nheights of Gilboa. When Saul and his Benjamites advanced to meet the\nPhilistines, the latter succeeded in interposing themselves between\nthe Israelite army and its base in Benjamin\u2015\u2015an easy achievement for\nan enemy who by his chariots possessed a high degree of mobility. Saul\nwas therefore driven to take up his position on the _north_ side of\nthe plain on Mount Gilboa, where he was attacked by the Philistines,\nprobably from the south-west on which side the slopes of the mountain\nare comparatively gentle. The Israelites, cut off from their homes,\noutmarched, outgeneralled, and probably outnumbered, were speedily\nrouted. The battle of Gilboa was won, like that of Hastings, by cavalry\n(chariots) and archers (verse 3) against infantry, which was obliged\nto stand on the defensive, under pain of being cut to pieces if it\nventured to attack. See G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy\nLand_, pp. 400 ff.\n\n \u00b2And the Philistines followed hard after Saul and after his\n sons; and the Philistines slew Jonathan, and Abinadab\u00b9, and\n Malchi-shua, the sons of Saul. \u00b3And the battle went sore against\n Saul, and the archers overtook him; and he was distressed by\n reason of the archers.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Samuel xiv. 49, _Ishvi_.\n\n=2.= _Malchi-shua_] This is the correct spelling, not _Melchi-shua_.\n\n \u2074Then said Saul unto his armourbearer, Draw thy sword, and\n thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised come\n and abuse\u00b9 me. But his armourbearer would not; for he was sore\n afraid. Therefore Saul took his sword, and fell upon it. \u2075And\n when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead, he likewise fell\n upon his sword, and died.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _make a mock of me_.\n\n=4.= _unto his armourbearer_] Compare Judges ix. 54 (the death of\nAbimelech). One function of an armourbearer was to give the \u201ccoup de\ngr\u00e2ce\u201d to fallen enemies (1 Samuel xiv. 13), but sometimes the same\noffice had to be executed for friends. Possibly the man refused from\nfear of blood-revenge, which would be the more certainly exacted in\nthe case of the Lord\u2019s Anointed, compare 1 Samuel ii. 22, xxvi. 9 (so\nCurtis).\n\n_and abuse me_] i.e. wreak their cruel will upon me; compare Judges\ni. 6.\n\n \u2076So Saul died, and his three sons; and all his house died\n together.\n\n=6.= _all his house_] In Samuel \u201chis armourbearer and all his men.\u201d The\nreference may be to Saul\u2019s servants: his family was not exterminated in\nthis battle.\n\n \u2077And when all the men of Israel that were in the valley saw that\n they fled, and that Saul and his sons were dead, they forsook\n their cities, and fled; and the Philistines came and dwelt in\n them.\n \u2078And it came to pass on the morrow, when the Philistines came\n to strip the slain, that they found Saul and his sons fallen in\n mount Gilboa.\n\n=7.= _that were in the valley_] The \u201cvalley of Jezreel\u201d (Hosea i. 5),\ncalled in later times the \u201cplain of Esdrelon\u201d (Esdraelon), is meant.\n\n_forsook their cities_] Among these was no doubt Beth-shan (Beisan)\n\u201cthe key of Western Palestine\u201d (see G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography\nof the Holy Land_ pp. 358 f.), where Saul\u2019s body was exposed (1 Samuel\nxxxi. 12).\n\n_and dwelt in them_] Perhaps for a short while only, compare 2 Samuel\nii. 9, \u201c[Abner] made him (Ish-bosheth) king over ... _Jezreel_.\u201d\nIsh-bosheth, however, may have \u201cruled\u201d only in acknowledgment of a\nPhilistine suzerainty.\n\n \u2079And they stripped him, and took his head, and his armour, and\n sent into the land of the Philistines round about, to carry the\n tidings unto their idols, and to the people.\n\n=9.= _to carry the tidings unto their idols_] Better, as in Samuel, \u201cto\npublish it _in the house_ (or _houses_) of their idols\u201d; compare the\nnext verse. The news was published by the exhibition of trophies of the\nvictory in the Philistine temples.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And they put his armour in the house of their gods, and\n fastened his head in the house of Dagon.\n\n=10.= _in the house of their gods_] In Samuel (more definitely) \u201cin\nthe house (_or_ houses) of Ashtaroth,\u201d Ashtaroth being the plural of\n_Ashtoreth_, a goddess, who seems here to bear a martial character.\n(The name _Ashtoreth_ is an artificial formation, the proper form being\n_Ashtarte_. The vowels of the word _b\u014dsh\u0115th_, i.e. _shame_, were used\nfor the last two syllables in place of the true vowels; compare note on\nviii. 33.) She was apparently consort of the Phoenician Baal (Judges ii.\n13, x. 6).\n\n_fastened his head in the house of Dagon_ (literally _Beth-Dagon_)]\nIn Samuel _fastened his body to the wall of Beth-shan_. The reading of\nChronicles is probably an arbitrary alteration made by the Chronicler\nout of regard for 1 Samuel xxxi. 9, where it is related that the\nPhilistines cut off Saul\u2019s head. It is just possible that the variation\npoints to a fuller original text containing all three statements\u2015\u2015that\nSaul\u2019s armour was placed in the temple of Ashtarte, his head in the\n\u201chouse of Dagon,\u201d and his headless corpse fastened to the walls of\nBeth-shan. Beth-shan is north-east of Gilboa, about four miles distant\nfrom the Jordan, and about a day\u2019s march (1 Samuel xxxi. 12) from\nJabesh (verse 11), which was situated on the other side of Jordan in\nGilead.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And when all Jabesh-gilead heard all that the Philistines had\n done to Saul,\n\n=11.= _Jabesh-gilead_] See 1 Samuel xi. 1\u201211; 2 Samuel ii. 4\u20127.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2all the valiant men arose, and took away the body of Saul, and\n the bodies of his sons, and brought them to Jabesh, and buried\n their bones under the oak\u00b9 in Jabesh, and fasted seven days.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _terebinth_.\n\n=12.= _took away_] i.e. from the walls of Beth-shan (so Peshit\u1e6da).\n\n_to Jabesh_] Samuel adds \u201cand burned them there.\u201d The Chronicler omits\nthis statement perhaps because he inferred that the bones were not\n_destroyed_ by this burning; compare 2 Samuel xxi. 12\u201214 (the bones of\nSaul and Jonathan brought from Jabesh in David\u2019s reign and re-interred\nin the family sepulchre) or more probably because burning was not a\nusual funeral rite among the Jews (compare 2 Chronicles xvi. 14, note),\nand indeed was regarded with abhorrence (compare Amos ii. 1).\n\n_under the oak_] margin, _terebinth_. Large trees, being rare in\nPalestine, frequently serve as landmarks; compare Judges iv. 5; 1\nSamuel xxii. 6 (\u201ctamarisk tree\u201d Revised Version).\n\n_fasted seven days_] Fasting involved abstinence from food during\ndaylight. David fasted \u201ctill the evening\u201d in mourning for Saul (2\nSamuel i. 12) and for Abner (2 Samuel iii. 35). The fast of Jabesh was\na sevenfold fast.\n\n\n =13, 14= (peculiar to Chronicles).\n THE MORAL OF THE OVERTHROW OF THE HOUSE OF SAUL.\n\nSuch reflexions as these are characteristic of the Chronicler; compare\n2 Chronicles xii. 2 (note), xxii. 7, xxiv. 24, xxv. 27. They are not so\nfrequent in Samuel and Kings.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3So Saul died for\u00b9 his trespass which he committed against the\n LORD, because of the word of the LORD, which he kept not; and\n also for that he asked counsel of one that had a familiar spirit,\n to inquire _thereby_,\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in_.\n\n=13.= _his trespass_] compare 2 Chronicles xxvi. 16. The reference is\nto Saul\u2019s sacrifice (1 Samuel xiii. 13, 14), and disobedience (1 Samuel\nxv. 23).\n\n_asked counsel ... spirit_] i.e. of the witch of Endor, 1 Samuel\nxxviii. 7 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2074and inquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and\n turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse.\n\n=14.= _and inquired not of the LORD_] Compare xiii. 3. The Chronicler\npresumably does not count inquiries made too late; compare 1 Samuel\nxxviii. 6 (Saul inquires of the Lord, but receives no answer).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XI.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (= 2\u00a0Samuel v. 1\u20123).\n DAVID MADE KING OVER ALL ISRAEL.\n\nThe remaining chapters of the first book of Chronicles are occupied\nwith the reign of David, who is represented as a king fulfilling the\nChronicler\u2019s highest ideals of piety and prosperity. For some general\nremarks on the difference between the picture thus given and the David\nof Samuel see the note on xxviii. 1.\n\n \u00b9Then all Israel gathered themselves to David unto Hebron,\n saying, Behold, we are thy bone and thy flesh.\n\n=1.= _Then_] Render =And=.\n\n_all Israel_] Chronicles has nothing here corresponding to 2 Samuel\ni.\u2012iv., chapters which cover a period of seven years (2 Samuel v. 5).\nDavid\u2019s earlier coronation by the men of Judah (2 Samuel ii. 4), the\nreign of Ish-bosheth over Northern and Eastern Israel (2 Samuel ii.\n8 ff.), and the \u201clong war\u201d (2 Samuel iii. 1) with the house of Saul\nare omitted not of course because the Chronicler was ignorant of these\nevents (for see the references in verses 15, 17; xii. 1, 23, 29, etc.),\nbut for the reason set forth above in the head-note to chapters x.\u2012xxix.\nThe Chronicler\u2019s account is perhaps deliberately adapted to convey an\nimpression of the ease with which the ideal David ascends the throne\nof a united Israel; and, if we had not the narrative in Samuel to help\nus, we should be left with a conception of the period very different\nfrom the actual course of events. How strange, too, would be the sudden\ntransition from the picture of defeat and flight of Israel in chapter\nx. to the calm assemblage of all Israel in chapter xi., and how obscure\nthe various references to David\u2019s earlier life in xi. 15 ff.!\n\n_we are thy bone and thy flesh_] The phrase is not to be taken strictly\nas implying kinship, for only the tribe of Judah could say \u201cThe king is\nnear of kin to us\u201d (2 Samuel xix. 42). The other tribes mean that they\nwill obey David as though he were their own kin.\n\n \u00b2In times past, even when Saul was king, it was thou that\n leddest out and broughtest in Israel: and the LORD thy God said\n unto thee, Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be\n prince\u00b9 over my people Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _leader_.\n\n=2.= _the LORD thy God said_] Compare verses 3, 10; 1 Samuel xvi. 1\u201213.\n\n_prince_] compare v. 2, note.\n\n \u00b3So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and\n David made a covenant with them in Hebron before the LORD; and\n they anointed David king over Israel, according to the word of\n the LORD by the hand of Samuel.\n\n=3.= _made a covenant_] i.e. gave them a charter in which he promised\nto respect existing rights; compare 1 Samuel x. 25 (Samuel writes the\n\u201cmanner\u201d of the kingdom).\n\n_before the LORD_] One method of entering into a covenant \u201cbefore the\nLORD\u201d was to pass between the parts of a sacrificed animal; compare\nJeremiah xxxiv. 18, 19.\n\nChronicles has nothing here corresponding with 2 Samuel v. 4, 5; but\ncompare xxix. 27.\n\n_according ... Samuel_] Compare 1 Samuel xv. 28, xvi. 1, 3.\n\n\n =4\u20129= (= 2\u00a0Samuel v. 6\u201210).\n THE \u201cCITY OF DAVID\u201d CAPTURED AND MADE A ROYAL RESIDENCE.\n\n \u2074And David and all Israel went to Jerusalem (the same is Jebus);\n and the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, were there.\n\n=4.= _David and all Israel_] In Samuel (more accurately) \u201cThe king\nand _his men_,\u201d i.e. his household and body-guard; compare x. 6, note.\nThe exploit recorded in Samuel is invested by the Chronicler with the\ngrandeur of a state campaign.\n\n_the same is Jebus_] Jerusalem (or Jebus) consisted, it seems (compare\nverse 8; Judges i. 21), of a citadel inhabited by Jebusites and of a\nlower city inhabited by a mixed population of Jebusites and Benjamites.\nIt was the citadel only which David stormed. Jerusalem is called Jebus\nonly here and in Judges xix. 10 f. The notion that Jebus was an ancient\nname for the city _may_ be only a late fancy, but it is possible that\nit was sometimes so called in the days of the Jebusite rule. What is\ncertain is that the name Jerusalem is ancient, for it occurs frequently\n(as Urusalim) in the Amarna tablets, _circa_ 1400 B.C. See G.\u00a0A. Smith,\n_Jerusalem_.\n\n_the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land_] i.e. masters of that\nterritory before the Israelite invasion. The Jebusites have been\nthought to be of Hittite origin, but they were probably Semites, like\nthe Israelites (see G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Jerusalem_, II. 16\u201218).\n\n \u2075And the inhabitants of Jebus said to David, Thou shalt not come\n in hither. Nevertheless David took the strong hold of Zion; the\n same is the city of David.\n\n=5.= _Thou shalt not come in hither_]. Undoubtedly the Chronicler\nunderstood the resistance offered by the Jebusites to be of a military\ncharacter, and the text of Samuel _as translated_ in Authorized\nVersion and Revised Version follows the same notion. See, however,\nthe reinterpretation of the Samuel text by Barnes in the _Expositor_,\nJanuary, 1914, where it is urged that the word (_m\u1d49tsudah_) rendered\n\u201c_strong hold_\u201d means not a well-fortified citadel but simply a\nnatural hiding place, such as a thicket or a cavern (which in this\ncase probably was used as a shrine by the Jebusites).\n\n_the strong hold of Zion_] See the previous note. The site of this\n\u201chold\u201d or cavern (afterwards \u201cthe city of David\u201d) is on the south-east\nof the present city, on the south of the Haram (the Temple area), and\non a level lower than that of the Haram (see Smith, _Jerusalem_, II.\n39 ff.).\n\n \u2076And David said, Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites first shall\n be chief and captain. And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up\n first, and was made chief. \u2077And David dwelt in the strong hold;\n therefore they called it the city of David.\n\n=6.= _Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites_] The reference here is no\ndoubt to military violence. See, however, the article by Barnes cited\nabove. The text in Samuel is very difficult and corrupt, and has been\nsimplified by the Chronicler.\n\n_Joab the son of Zeruiah_] Zeruiah was David\u2019s sister (ii. 16). It\nis not said in Samuel that Joab first became commander-in-chief on\nthis occasion; on the contrary he appears in command (2 Samuel ii. 13)\nduring the civil war against the house of Saul. Perhaps he was first\nformally acknowledged as commander at the seizure of Jerusalem.\n\n \u2078And he built the city round about, from Millo even round about:\n and Joab repaired\u00b9 the rest of the city. \u2079And David waxed\n greater and greater; for the LORD of hosts was with him.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _revived_.\n\n=8.= _from Millo even round about_] Literally \u201cthe Millo,\u201d meaning\nperhaps \u201cThe filling up,\u201d was some part of the defences of the \u201ccity\nof David,\u201d either a _solid_ tower or perhaps an armoury, or a piece\nof supplementary work intended to strengthen an existing wall (LXX.\n2 Chronicles xxxii. 5, \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1, \u201csupport\u201d). See Smith, _Jerusalem_\nII. 40 f.\n\n_Joab_] This tradition about Joab is not mentioned in Samuel.\n\n_repaired the rest of the city_] literally _revived_, compare Nehemiah\niv. 2 (= Hebrew iii. 34). Peshit\u1e6da translates: \u201cJoab gave his right\nhand to the rest of the men who were in the city\u201d; and it has been\nproposed to render the clause _spared_ or _kept alive the rest of\nthe city_ (i.e. the remaining people, the Benjamites who dwelt there\nwith the Jebusites [Judges i. 21]). The rendering _repaired_ is to be\npreferred.\n\n\n =10\u201241a= (compare 2 Samuel xxiii. 8\u201239).\n DAVID\u2019S MIGHTY MEN AND THEIR DEEDS.\n\nThis section seems to consist of elements drawn from different sources\nand brought together (probably by the author of Samuel) in order to\ngive as complete a list as possible of the heroes who at different\ntimes in David\u2019s career did good service to Israel.\n\nThe names of twelve of these heroes reappear in chapter xxvii. as the\ncommanders of David\u2019s twelve \u201ccourses.\u201d\n\nVerses =11\u201214= (= 2 Samuel xxiii. 8\u201212) deal with two (in Samuel three)\nheroes otherwise unknown.\n\nVerses =15\u201219= (= 2 Samuel xxiii. 13\u201217) are independent of the\nforegoing and narrate an exploit of three unnamed heroes.\n\nVerses =20\u201225= (= 2 Samuel xxiii. 18\u201223) seem in turn to be independent\nof =15\u201219=, and verses 21, 25 in particular seem to be quoted from some\nlost poem. These verses contain the eulogy of Abishai and Benaiah.\n\nVerses =26\u201241a= (= 2 Samuel xxiii. 24\u201239) contain thirty names\nof heroes whose exploits are not recorded. It is to be noted that\nChronicles, verses =41b\u201247=, adds some sixteen names at the end which\nare not given in Samuel.\n\nJoab is not included in the formal list because he has been already\nmentioned (verse 6).\n\nLists of names are favourite features in oriental Histories. Thus Ibn\nHish\u0101m in his _Life_ of Mohammed gives a list of the 83 Moslems who\ntook refuge in Abyssinia from the persecution of the Koreish, of the\n75 inhabitants of Medina who swore allegiance to the Prophet before the\nHegira, and even of the 314 Moslems who were present at the battle of\nBedr.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Now these are the chief of the mighty men whom David had,\n who shewed\u00b9 themselves strong with him in his kingdom, together\n with all Israel, to make him king, according to the word of the\n LORD concerning Israel.\n\n \u00b9 _held strongly with him_.\n\n=10.= _Now these_] This verse is the Chronicler\u2019s own heading which he\nprefixes to the list of heroes taken from Samuel, while retaining (in\nverse 11) the original heading given in Samuel.\n\n_who shewed themselves strong with him_] Render as margin, =who held\nstrongly with him=. Compare xii. 23.\n\n_to make him king_] as though all the mighty men participated in the\ncoronation at Hebron, whereas in reality many must have won their place\nand fame only in the later campaigns of David.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And this is the number of the mighty men whom David had:\n Jashobeam, the son of a Hachmonite, the chief of the thirty\u00b9; he\n lifted up his spear against three hundred and\u00b2 slew them at one\n time.\n\n \u00b9 Another reading is, _captains_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _slain_.\n\n=11.= _this is the number_] More suitably in Samuel, \u201cThese be the\nnames.\u201d\n\n_Jashobeam_] Called \u201cJashobeam the son of Zabdiel\u201d in xxvii. 2. The\nname \u201cJashobeam\u201d is however uncertain. In 2 Samuel (xxiii. 8, Revised\nVersion) it appears as \u201cJosheb-basshebeth,\u201d which is certainly wrong.\nLXX. (B) varies in reproducing the name, but it seems to have read\n\u201cIsh-bosheth\u201d in Samuel, and \u201cIsh-baal\u201d (Esh-baal) in both places of\nChronicles. These readings are probably right. For the relation of the\nforms \u201cIsh-bosheth,\u201d \u201cEsh-baal\u201d see viii. 33, note.\n\n_son of a Hachmonite_] Compare xxvii. 32. In Samuel (wrongly) \u201ca\nTahchemonite.\u201d\n\n_chief of the thirty_] So the Hebrew margin (_Keth\u012bb_), but the Hebrew\ntext (_\u1e32er\u012b_) reads _chief of the captains_, which the Authorized\nVersion follows. Neither Authorized Version nor Revised Version gives\nsatisfactory sense. In 2 Samuel xxiii. 8 the LXX. gives, _chief of the\nthird part_ [_of the army_], compare 2 Samuel xviii. 2; and this is\nperhaps right; the Hebrew text of Samuel (if not faulty) probably bears\nthe same sense. Ish-baal (Jashobeam) then is one of three \u201cmightiest\nof the mighty\u201d men, the other two being Eleazar (verse 12) and Shammah\n(= 2 Samuel xxiii. 11; omitted in Chronicles\u2015\u2015see note on verses 12,\n13).\n\n_he lifted up his spear_] Literally \u201che aroused his spear,\u201d a poetic\nexpression.\n\n_against three hundred_] Samuel \u201cagainst eight hundred\u201d; so Peshit\u1e6da\n(good MSS.) of Chronicles Some light is thrown on this exploit by\n1 Samuel xviii. 25\u201227; the two hundred Philistines slain by David and\nhis men were carefully counted and reckoned to the credit of David\npersonally.\n\n=12, 13.= These verses answer in part to verses 9 and 11 of Samuel, but\nsince verse 10 and parts of verses 9, 11 of Samuel have no equivalent\nin Chronicles, two incidents are confounded, and the name of a hero\n(Shammah) is omitted, his exploit being ascribed to Eleazar.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodo, the Ahohite, who\n was one of the three mighty men.\n\n=12.= _Eleazar the son of Dodo_] Probably to be identified with \u201cDodai\nthe Ahohite,\u201d the commander of the second \u201ccourse\u201d; xxvii. 4.\n\n_the three mighty men_] i.e. the three who were with David on the\noccasion mentioned in 2 Samuel xxiii. 9.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3He was with David at Pas-dammim\u00b9, and there the Philistines\n were gathered together to battle, where was a plot of ground\n full of barley; and the people fled from before the Philistines.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Samuel xvii. 1, _Ephes-dammim_.\n\n=13.= _at Pas-dammim_] Perhaps the same place as \u201cEphes-dammim\u201d\nwhich is mentioned in 1 Samuel xvii. 1 as the gathering-place of the\nPhilistines. It was in the south-west of Judah.\n\n_barley_] Samuel \u201clentils.\u201d The two words resemble each other in Hebrew\nand might be confused by an unwary scribe.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And they stood in the midst of the plot, and defended it, and\n slew the Philistines; and the LORD saved them by a great\n victory\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _salvation_.\n\n=14.= _they stood_] The subject of the verb in 2 Samuel xxiii. 12 is\nShammah, here David and Eleazar together.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And three of the thirty chief went down to the rock to David,\n into the cave of Adullam; and the host of the Philistines were\n encamped in the valley of Rephaim.\n\n=15.= _to the rock_] Samuel \u201cin the harvest-time.\u201d Probably both\nreadings are wrong, and the original form of the verse was perhaps _And\nthree of the thirty went down at the beginning of harvest to David_,\netc. (see Driver, _Notes on Hebrew text of Samuel_\u00b2, p. 366).\n\n_the cave of Adullam_] So also in 1 Samuel xxii. 1; 2 Samuel xxiii.\n13. In verse 16 below, and in 1 Samuel xxii. 4 it is called the \u201chold.\u201d\nProbably \u201cthe \u2018hold\u2019 was a tangle of hill and forest, in the centre of\nwhich the \u2018cave of Adullam\u2019 served as David\u2019s headquarters\u201d (Barnes,\n_Expositor_, January, 1914): the whole forming an admirable retreat\nfor men acquainted with its intricacies. An identification with a\ncommanding hill in the Shephelah, called \u201c_Aid-el-ma_,\u201d has been\nsuggested (see G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_\npp. 229, 230, note).\n\n_the valley of Rephaim_] Probably the broad depression traversed by the\nroad from Jerusalem to Beth-lehem. See Joshua xv. 8 (\u201cvale of Rephaim\u201d\nRevised Version; \u201cvalley of the giants\u201d Authorized Version).\n\n \u00b9\u2076And David was then in the hold, and the garrison of the\n Philistines was then in Beth-lehem. \u00b9\u2077And David longed, and\n said, Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of\n Beth-lehem, which is by the gate!\n\n=16.= _in the hold_] compare note on _the cave of Adullam_ (verse 15).\n\n \u00b9\u2078And the three brake through the host of the Philistines, and\n drew water out of the well of Beth-lehem, that was by the gate,\n and took it, and brought it to David: but David would not drink\n thereof, but poured it out unto the LORD, \u00b9\u2079and said, My God\n forbid it me, that I should do this: shall I drink the blood of\n these men that\u00b9 have put their lives in jeopardy? for with _the\n jeopardy of_ their lives they brought it. Therefore he would not\n drink it. These things did the three mighty men.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _with their lives_.\n\n=18.= _brake through the host_] or _camp_. The word \u201chost\u201d in the\nHebrew regularly means a host encamped, not a host embattled. Perhaps\nthis exploit took place by night; compare the deed of David and Abishai\n(1 Samuel xxvi. 6\u201212).\n\n_poured it out_] i.e. as a libation-offering.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Abishai\u00b9, the brother of Joab, he was chief of the three:\n for he lifted up his spear against three hundred and\u00b2 slew them,\n and had a name among the three. Of\u00b3 the three,\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Abshai_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _slain_.\n\n \u00b3 Or, _Of the three in the second rank he was the most\n honourable_.\n\n=20.= _chief of the three_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 18 (_Keth\u012bb_)\nAbishai is called by the same title (Hebrew _r\u014dsh hassh\u0101l\u012bshi_) as\nJosheb-basshebeth (2 Samuel xxiii. verse 8). This title probably means\n_chief of the third part_ [_of the army_]; compare verse 11, note.\n_Chief of the three_ is a faulty reading: it certainly ought not to\nbe taken in connection with the three mighty men\u2015\u2015Jashobeam (Ishbaal),\nEleazar and \u2015\u2015referred to in verses 10 ff. Probably a reading\n\u201cchief of the thirty,\u201d for which there is some MS. authority, is\ncorrect; but the references here and in the following verse are obscure\n(see Driver, _Samuel_\u00b2, pp. 367, 368).\n\n_had a name among the three_] Compare verse 24, where the same thing is\nsaid of Benaiah. The three meant are either the three of verses 15\u201219\nor else an unknown three; compare next note.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9he was more honourable than the two, and was made their\n captain: howbeit he attained not to the _first_ three.\n\n=21.= _Of the three, he was more honourable than the two_] margin \u201c_Of\nthe three in the second rank he was the most honourable._\u201d Neither of\nthese renderings is satisfactory, and the text is certainly corrupt\n(compare 2 Samuel xxiii. 19), and should be corrected. Read perhaps:\n=He was more honourable than the three=, or perhaps, =than the thirty=.\nThe verse probably comes from a lost poem. What is meant by the _three_\nand by _the first three_ cannot be determined owing to the loss of the\ncontext.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man of\n Kabzeel, who had done mighty deeds, he slew the two _sons of_\n Ariel of Moab: he went down also and slew a lion in the midst of\n a pit in time of snow.\n\n=22.= _Benaiah_] See 2 Samuel viii. 18; 1 Kings i. 8 ff., ii. 25\u201235.\n\n_Kabzeel_] It was in the south of Judah; Joshua xv. 21.\n\n_he slew the two_ sons of _Ariel of Moab_] So LXX. of 2 Samuel xxiii.\n20. The phrase is very difficult. Some, emending the text, read \u201cHe\nslew two young lions, having gone down to their lair.\u201d Another but\nan improbable conjecture is \u201che smote the two altar-pillars of Moab,\u201d\ni.e. he overthrew the two high columns on which the sacred fire of\nthe Moabites was kept (Robertson Smith, _Religion of the Semites_,\nAdditional Note L). To injure or defile the sacred place of an enemy\nwas a common practice in ancient war.\n\n_in time of snow_] \u201cThe beast had strayed up the Judaean hills from\nJordan, and had been caught in a sudden snowstorm. Where else than\nin Palestine could lions and snow thus come together?\u201d G.\u00a0A. Smith,\n_Historical Geography of the Holy Land_ p. 65.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And he slew an Egyptian, a man of great stature, five cubits\n high; and in the Egyptian\u2019s hand was a spear like a weaver\u2019s\n beam; and he went down to him with a staff, and plucked the\n spear out of the Egyptian\u2019s hand, and slew him with his own\n spear. \u00b2\u2074These things did Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and had a\n name among the three mighty men.\n\n=23.= _of great stature_] Samuel has a better reading, \u201ca goodly man\u201d\n(man of presence), \u201cgoodliness\u201d according to the Hebrews consisting in\nbeing well-built for warlike exercises.\n\n_a staff_] Hebrew _sh\u0113bhet_, i.e. the \u201crod\u201d or \u201cclub\u201d carried by\nshepherds as a defence against wild-beasts; Psalms ii. 9 (\u201crod\u201d);\nxxiii. 4 \u201crod\u201d); 2 Samuel xviii. 14 (\u201cdarts\u201d). This \u201crod\u201d had a point\nat one end, so that it could on occasion be used as a stabbing weapon.\n\n \u00b2\u2075Behold, he was more honourable than the thirty, but he\n attained not to the _first_ three: and David set him over his\n guard\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _council_.\n\n=25.= _more honourable than the thirty_] On the phrase, see verse 21,\nnote. The verse probably comes from some poem written in praise of\nBenaiah. Compare xxvii. 6.\n\n_guard_] The same Hebrew word, _mishma\u2018ath_, is translated \u201ccouncil\u201d in\nthe margin here and also in 1 Samuel xxii. 14. The literal meaning is\n\u201cobedience\u201d; it seems both here and in Samuel (1 Samuel xxii. 14) to\ndesignate those who executed the king\u2019s commands, i.e. his ministers.\n(_Minister_ = \u201cservant.\u201d)\n\n \u00b2\u2076Also the mighty men of the armies; Asahel the brother of\n Joab, Elhanan the son of Dodo of Beth-lehem;\n\n=26.= _Asahel_] Whose death at the hands of Abner, the general of\nIshbosheth, was the cause of the famous feud between Abner and Joab,\ncompare 2 Samuel ii. 18 ff., iii. 27.\n\n_Elhanan_] Called here (= 2 Samuel xxiii. 24) \u201cson of Dodo,\u201d but\nperhaps to be identified with \u201cElhanan the son of Jair\u201d of xx. 5\n(= 2 Samuel xxi. 19, where _Jaare-oregim_ is an error for _Jair_ [see\nDriver, _Samuel_\u00b2, pp. 367, 368]).\n\n \u00b2\u2077Shammoth\u00b9 the Harorite, Helez the Pelonite\u00b2;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 25, _Shamah the Harodite_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 26, _Paltite_.\n\n=27.= _the Harorite_] Read, =the Harodite= (so Samuel). Compare Judges\nvi. 23, vii. 1, whence it appears that Harod was in (or near) the\nvalley of Jezreel. Compare also 1 Chronicles xxvii. 8 (\u201cShamhuth\nthe Izrahite\u201d), where the same person seems to be meant. \u201cElika the\nHarodite\u201d (Samuel) is not found in Chronicles.\n\n_Helez the Pelonite_] Compare xxvii. 10, where he is described as a\ncaptain of the children of Ephraim. In 2 Samuel xxiii. 26 however it is\nHelez _the Paltite_, i.e. (apparently) \u201cthe inhabitant of Beth-pelet\u201d\nin the south of Judah (Joshua xv. 27).\n\n \u00b2\u2078Ira the son of Ikkesh the Tekoite, Abiezer the Anathothite;\n\n=28.= _Ira the son of Ikkesh the Tekoite_] Compare xxvii. 9. For\n_Tekoa_ see 2 Chronicles xx. 20, note.\n\n_Abiezer the Anathothite_] xxvii. 12 and 2 Samuel xxiii. 27. Anathoth\nwas in Benjamin; it was Jeremiah\u2019s village (Jeremiah i. 1, xi. 21 ff.),\nnow _An\u0101ta_, 2\u00bd miles north-north-east of Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Sibbecai\u00b9 the Hushathite, Ilai\u00b2 the Ahohite;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 27, _Mebunnai_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 28, _Zalmon_.\n\n=29.= _Sibbecai_] So xxvii. 11, but in 2 Samuel xxiii. 27 \u201cMebunnai.\u201d\n\n_the Hushathite_] _Hushah_ is probably the name of some place near\nBeth-lehem (iv. 4). _Shuah_ (iv. verse 11) may be another form of the\nname.\n\n_Ilai_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 28 \u201cZalmon.\u201d The two words are perhaps only\nvarious readings of the name which originally appeared in the list.\n\n_the Ahohite_] He was of a Benjamite family; viii. 4 (\u201cAhoah\u201d).\n\n \u00b3\u2070Maharai the Netophathite, Heled\u00b9 the son of Baanah the\n Netophathite;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 29, _Heleb_.\n\n=30.= _Maharai the Netophathite_] So in xxvii. 13, with \u201cof the\nZerahites\u201d (Revised Version) added. A _Netophathite_ might come either\nfrom Netophah (a village in Judah not far from Beth-lehem), or from the\n\u201cvillages of the Netophathites\u201d (ix. 16, note).\n\n_Heled_] In xxvii. 15 \u201cHeldai,\u201d a name found in Zechariah iv. 10.\n\u201cHeleb\u201d in 2 Samuel xxiii. 29 is probably a wrong reading.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Ithai the son of Ribai of Gibeah of the children of Benjamin,\n Benaiah the Pirathonite;\n\n=31.= _Ithai_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 29 \u201cIttai,\u201d the same name as in\n2 Samuel xv. 19, xviii. 2, but a different person is meant.\n\n_Benaiah the Pirathonite_] So in xxvii. 14; 2 Samuel xxiii. 30.\nPirathon was a town in Ephraim; Judges xii. 15. Probably the place is\nmentioned also in 1 Maccabees ix. 50 (\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u0398\u03b1\u03bc\u03bd\u03ac\u03b8\u03b1 \u03a6\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd).\n\n \u00b3\u00b2Hurai\u00b9 of the brooks of Gaash, Abiel\u00b2 the Arbathite;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 30, _Hiddai_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 31, _Abi-albon_.\n\n=32.= _Hurai_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 30, \u201cHiddai.\u201d The true form of the\nname is uncertain; neither form occurs elsewhere.\n\n_Gaash_] A mountain in Ephraim; Judges ii. 9 (= Joshua xxiv. 30).\n\n_Abiel_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 31 \u201cAbi-albon.\u201d \u201cArbathite\u201d means\n\u201cinhabitant of Beth Arabah\u201d; a town on the border between Judah and\nBenjamin, Joshua xv. 6.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3Azmaveth the Baharumite, Eliahba the Shaalbonite;\n\n=33.= _Baharumite_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 31 \u201cBarhumite.\u201d We should read\nin both places, = Bahurimite=, i.e. \u201cinhabitant of Bahurim,\u201d a town of\nBenjamin (2 Samuel iii. 16).\n\n_Shaalbonite_] i.e. \u201cinhabitant of Shaalbim\u201d (Judges i. 35), or\n\u201cShaalabbin\u201d (Joshua xix. 42), a town in Dan.\n\n \u00b3\u2074the sons of Hashem\u00b9 the Gizonite, Jonathan the son of Shage\n the Hararite;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 32, _Jashen_.\n\n=34.= _the sons of Hashem the Gizonite_] The corresponding clause in\n2 Samuel xxiii. 32 is simply \u201cthe sons of Jashen.\u201d The text is corrupt\nin both places. LXX. (Chronicles) for _the sons of_ has the proper\nname \u201cBenaiah.\u201d Read perhaps \u201cJashen the Gunite\u201d (compare Numbers\nxxvi. 48) omitting _the sons of_ (Hebrew _b\u0115n\u0113_) as arising from a\nmistaken repetition of the last three letters of Shaalbonite (Hebrew\nform).\n\n_Jonathan the son of Shage_] Compare 2 Samuel xxiii. 32, 33, where the\nright reading seems to be \u201cJonathan the son of Shammah.\u201d Nothing is\nknown of the meaning of \u201cHararite,\u201d nor is the reading certain.\n\n \u00b3\u2075Ahiam the son of Sacar\u00b9 the Hararite, Eliphal\u00b2 the son of Ur;\n \u00b3\u2076Hepher the Mecherathite, Ahijah the Pelonite;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 33, _Sharar_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 34, _Eliphelet the son of Ahasbai_.\n\n=35.= _Sacar_] In 2 Samuel \u201cSharar.\u201d\n\n=35, 36.= _Eliphal the son of Ur; Hepher the Mecherathite_] In 2 Samuel\nxxiii. 34 \u201cEliphelet the son of Ahasbai, the son of the Maacathite.\u201d\nChronicles has two heroes against one in 2 Samuel.\n\n=36.= _Ahijah the Pelonite_] A mutilated reading of 2 Samuel xxiii. 34,\n\u201cEliam the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite.\u201d For \u201cAhithophel\u201d see xxvii.\n33, note. \u201cGilonite\u201d means \u201cinhabitant of Giloh,\u201d a town in the hill\ncountry of Judah (Joshua xv. 51).\n\n \u00b3\u2077Hezro the Carmelite, Naarai\u00b9 the son of Ezbai;\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiii. 35, _Paarai the Arbite_.\n\n=37.= _Hezro_] So 2 Samuel xxiii. 35 (Revised Version following the\n_Keth\u012bb_); but Hezrai (Authorized Version following the _\u1e32er\u012b_).\n\n_the Carmelite_] i.e. inhabitant of Carmel, a town in the hill country\nof Judah (1 Samuel xxv. 2 ff.).\n\n_Naarai_] In 2 Samuel xxiii. 35 \u201cPaarai.\u201d The true form is lost.\n\n_the son of Ezbai_] In 2 Samuel \u201cthe Arbite\u201d (simply), i.e. (probably)\n\u201cinhabitant of Arab\u201d (Joshua xv. 52), a town in the hill country of\nJudah.\n\n \u00b3\u2078Joel the brother of Nathan, Mibhar the son of Hagri;\n\n=38.= _Joel the brother of Nathan, Mibhar_] _Mibhar_ is a corruption of\na word (\u201cof Zobah\u201d) belonging to the first clause of the verse; compare\n2 Samuel xxiii. 39, \u201cIgal the son of Nathan of Zobah.\u201d For \u201cZobah\u201d\ncompare xviii. 3.\n\n_the son of Hagri_] In 2 Samuel \u201cBani the Gadite.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u2079Zelek the Ammonite, Naharai the Berothite, the armourbearer of\n Joab the son of Zeruiah;\n\n=39.= _the Berothite_] Spelt generally \u201cBeerothite.\u201d Beeroth was a\nBenjamite town; 2 Samuel iv. 2.\n\n \u2074\u2070Ira the Ithrite, Gareb the Ithrite;\n\n=40.= _the Ithrite_] i.e. \u201cmember of the family (or \u2018clan\u2019) of Jether.\u201d\nCompare ii. 17, note.\n\n \u2074\u00b9Uriah the Hittite, Zabad the son of Ahlai;\n\n=41.= _Uriah the Hittite_] Compare 2 Samuel xi. 3. The list in 2 Samuel\nxxiii. closes with this name and with the note \u201cthirty and seven in\nall.\u201d In Chronicles the list is extended to include sixteen additional\nnames, which are all otherwise unknown.\n\n\n =41b\u201247= (no parallel in 2 Samuel).\n CONTINUATION OF THE LIST OF DAVID\u2019S MIGHTY MEN.\n\n \u2074\u00b2Adina the son of Shiza the Reubenite, a chief of the\n Reubenites, and thirty with him; \u2074\u00b3Hanan the son of Maacah, and\n Joshaphat the Mithnite;\n\n=42.= _and thirty with him_] This clause may be a marginal note taken\ninto the text at the wrong place. It was apparently meant to stand\nafter the name of Uriah the Hittite (verse 41) by some scribe who\nfollowed our present text and referred \u201cthe sons of Hashem\u201d (verse 34)\nto Azmaveth and Eliahba (verse 33), thus reckoning just thirty names\nfrom Asahel to Uriah. The clause should be read _either_ \u201cand up to him\nare thirty\u201d _or_ \u201cand all of them are thirty\u201d (compare 2 Samuel xxiii.\n39). Another possibility is that the proper place of these verses,\n42\u201247, is in chapter xii., after verse 7: they describe on that view\nthe _Reubenite_ gathering to David, and the names in verses 43\u201247 are\nthen to be regarded as a portion of the list of the _thirty_ with Adina\n(verse 42). On the characteristics of these additional names and of\nthose in xii. 1\u201222, see G. B. Gray, _Hebrew Proper Names_, p. 230.\n\n \u2074\u2074Uzzia the Ashterathite, Shama and Jeiel the sons of Hotham the\n Aroerite; \u2074\u2075Jediael the son of Shimri, and Joha his brother, the\n Tizite;\n\n=44.= _the Ashterathite_] i.e. inhabitant of Ashtaroth (vi. 71 [56,\nHebrew]), a city of Manasseh east of Jordan.\n\n_the Aroerite_] i.e. inhabitant of Aroer. There were two cities of this\nname, both east of Jordan; compare Joshua xiii. 16, 25.\n\n \u2074\u2076Eliel the Mahavite, and Jeribai, and Joshaviah, the sons of\n Elnaam, and Ithmah the Moabite;\n\n=46.= _the Mahavite_] Read perhaps, \u201cthe Mahanite,\u201d i.e. inhabitant\nof Mahanaim, a town east of Jordan; compare 2 Samuel xvii. 27; or \u201cthe\nMeonite,\u201d i.e. of Beth Meon, a Reubenite city, Joshua xiii. 17.\n\n \u2074\u2077Eliel, and Obed, and Jaasiel the Mezobaite.\n\n=47.= _the Mezobaite_] Read perhaps, \u201cof Zobah\u201d; compare verse 38,\nnote.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XII.\n\n\n =1\u201222= (not in Samuel).\n DAVID\u2019S ADHERENTS IN EXILE.\n\nThis section describes the gathering to David of helpers from Benjamin\n(verses 1\u20127), Gad (8\u201215), Benjamin and Judah (16\u201218), and Manasseh\n(19\u201222)\u2015\u2015before the death of Saul. It is entirely natural to suppose\nthat the men who followed David in the days of Saul\u2019s enmity were\nrewarded when he became king, and their descendants might well be\nprominent families in the land. Whether any such survived the exilic\nperiod and continued in later Jerusalem we cannot say for certain,\nbut it is probable that some names in this list are correct, though it\nis doubtful whether the Chronicler is drawing on contemporary family\ntradition or on written sources. The style, however, shows that the\ncomposition of the chapter is the Chronicler\u2019s, and the impression made\nby the whole should be contrasted with the picture of this period of\nDavid\u2019s life given in 1 Samuel xxii. 1 ff. In Samuel David is leader of\na small band of his own immediate friends, augmented by adventurers and\ndesperate men, and numbering in all some six hundred. In Chronicles one\ngathers that his followers were the choice spirits of Israel and Judah,\nwho rallied to his support until he had \u201ca great host like the host\nof God.\u201d Beyond question the picture in Samuel is true to fact, that\nin Chronicles being part of the idealisation of David as the perfect\nking, which the Chronicler (doubtless in full accord with the temper\nof his age) consistently presents. Its worth lies not in its historical\naccuracy, but in the religious enthusiasm which has produced it.\n\n\n =1\u20127.=\n BENJAMITE ADHERENTS OF DAVID.\n\n \u00b9Now these are they that came to David to Ziklag, while\u00b9 he\n yet kept himself close because of Saul the son of Kish: and they\n were among the mighty men, his helpers in war.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew being _yet shut up_.\n\n=1.= _to Ziklag_] David at Ziklag was a client of Achish, king of Gath\n(1 Samuel xxvii. 5, 6), so that Benjamites joining him put themselves\nunder their hereditary enemies the Philistines.\n\n_while he yet kept himself close_] Render, =while he was yet shut up=.\nDavid was shut in, as in a prison, and unable to move freely through\nthe land of Israel.\n\n \u00b2They were\u00b9 armed with bows, and could use both the right hand\n and the left in slinging stones and in shooting arrows from the\n bow; they were of Saul\u2019s brethren of Benjamin.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _drew the bow_.\n\n=2.= _both the right hand and the left_] In Judges xx. the Benjamites\nare said to have had seven hundred men _lefthanded_ who could sling\nstones at a hair and not miss (Judges xx. verse 16). Compare Judges\niii. 15.\n\n_they were of Saul\u2019s brethren of Benjamin_] _Brother_ is used in\nHebrew and Arabic for _fellow-tribesman_; compare 2 Samuel xix. 12.\nThe loyalty of Benjamin to Saul even after his death is attested\nby 2 Samuel ii. 15, 25, 31. But the importance of Benjamites in the\npost-exilic period would encourage such a tradition as is here recorded.\n\n \u00b3The chief was Ahiezer, then Joash, the sons of Shemaah the\n Gibeathite; and Jeziel, and Pelet, the sons of Azmaveth; and\n Beracah, and Jehu the Anathothite;\n\n=3.= _The chief was A., then J._] Read (compare LXX.) =A. the chief, J.\nthe son= (singular) =of Shemaah=.\n\n_Jehu the Anathothite_] i.e. man of Anathoth. See xi. 28, note.\n\n \u2074and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite, a mighty man among the thirty, and\n over the thirty; and Jeremiah, and Jahaziel, and Johanan, and\n Jozabad the Gederathite; \u2075Eluzai, and Jerimoth, and Bealiah, and\n Shemariah, and Shephatiah the Haruphite;\n\n=4.= _among the thirty, and over the thirty_] Ishmaiah\u2019s name does\nnot occur among _the thirty_ (2 Samuel xxiii. 24\u201239); the phrase is\ntherefore perhaps only a kind of superlative; Ishmaiah was worthy to be\nranked with _the thirty_ or even above them. Probably however the list\nin chapter xi. and that in chapter xii. belong to different times.\n\n_the Gederathite_] i.e. the man of Gederah. The only Gederah known was\nin the Judean Shephelah (Joshua xv. 36), so that it would seem that\nsome men of Judah are reckoned along with the Benjamites in these\nverses. Similarly in verse 7 men of the Judean town of _Gedor_ (iv. 4;\nJoshua xv. 58) are mentioned. Perhaps therefore some words introducing\nthe names of Judean heroes have dropped out. But an identification with\na Benjamite village _Jedireh_, North of Jerusalem, is also possible.\n\n \u2076Elkanah, and Isshiah, and Azarel, and Joezer, and Jashobeam,\n the Korahites; \u2077and Joelah, and Zebadiah, the sons of Jeroham of\n Gedor.\n\n=6.= _the Korahites_] Probably not the Levitic but the Calebite _sons\nof Korah_ (ii. 43), who belonged to Judah, are meant.\n\n\n =8\u201215.=\n GADITE ADHERENTS OF DAVID.\n\n \u2078And of the Gadites there separated themselves unto David to the\n hold in the wilderness, mighty men of valour, men trained for\n war, that could handle shield and spear; whose faces were like\n the faces of lions, and they were as swift as the roes upon the\n mountains; \u2079Ezer the chief, Obadiah the second, Eliab the third;\n\n=8.= _And of the Gadites_] The Gadites had the name of marauders\n(Genesis xlix. 19), and David\u2019s mode of life would attract them.\nChronologically verse 8 should precede verse 1; David was first \u201cin the\nhold\u201d and afterwards in Ziklag. On the reference to Gad and Manasseh\n(verse 19) see 2 Chronicles xv. 9.\n\n_separated themselves_] i.e. left their brethren east of Jordan and\ncame west.\n\n_to the hold in the wilderness_] It is uncertain whether this _hold_ be\nor be not the _cave of Adullam_. On the latter see xi. 15, note.\n\n_shield and spear_] The reference is to the manner of fighting in\nDavid\u2019s day. At the threat of an attack an army was drawn up in close\narray, shield touching shield and spears carried at the charge. Only\nin a high state of discipline could men quickly and effectively handle\nshield and spear thus (1 Samuel xvii. 2, 8, 21). (The Authorized\nVersion, \u201c_shield and buckler_,\u201d follows a mistake of several early\neditions of the printed Hebrew text.)\n\n_as the roes_] In David\u2019s lament (2 Samuel i.) Jonathan is compared to\na lion (verse 23) and to a _gazelle_ (verse 19 margin, the same Hebrew\nword as for _roe_ here).\n\n \u00b9\u2070Mishmannah the fourth, Jeremiah the fifth; \u00b9\u00b9Attai the sixth,\n Eliel the seventh; \u00b9\u00b2Johanan the eighth, Elzabad the ninth;\n \u00b9\u00b3Jeremiah the tenth, Machbannai the eleventh.\n\n=10.= _Jeremiah, the fifth_] Compare verse 13, _Jeremiah the tenth_. A\nvery slight difference of spelling distinguishes the two words in the\nHebrew.\n\n \u00b9\u2074These of the sons of Gad were captains of the host: he that\n was least was equal to\u00b9 an hundred, and the greatest to\u00b9 a\n thousand.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _over_.\n\n=14.= _he that was least ... thousand_] Compare Leviticus xxvi. 8;\nIsaiah xxx. 17.\n\n \u00b9\u2075These are they that went over Jordan in the first month, when\n it had overflown all its banks; and they put to flight all them\n of the valleys, both toward the east, and toward the west.\n\n=15.= _in the first month_] In Nisan (the month of harvest) when the\nsnow was melting and filling all streams; compare Joshua iii. 15.\n\n_all them of the valleys_] i.e. all inhabitants of the valleys who in\nthe interest of Saul sought to bar their march westward to join David.\n\n\n =16\u201218.=\n AMASAI AND HIS COMPANIONS.\n\n=16\u201218.= These interesting and beautiful passages are so different in\nstyle and sentiment from what precedes and what follows that they would\nseem to be drawn from another source. It is quite possible that they\nwere inserted thus between Gad and Manasseh by the Chronicler himself;\nbut that they are a later addition is probable from the fact that the\nadherents who came from Benjamin and perhaps Judah (verses 5\u20127, see\nnote on Gederathite) are given above, verses 1\u20127.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And there came of the children of Benjamin and Judah to the\n hold unto David.\n\n=16.= _to the hold_] See verse 8, notes.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And David went out to meet them, and answered and said unto\n them, If ye be come peaceably unto me to help me, mine heart\n shall be knit unto you: but if _ye be come_ to betray me to mine\n adversaries, seeing there is no wrong\u00b9 in mine hands, the God of\n our fathers look thereon, and rebuke it.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _violence_.\n\n=17.= _David went out to meet them_] Instead of letting himself be\nsurprised he took up a favourable position in advance from which he\ncould hold parley with them. The south of Judah with its ravines and\ncliffs affords many such positions.\n\n_the God of our fathers_, etc.] Compare the equally fine assertion\nof integrity of conduct and of faith in God made by David in 1 Samuel\nxxiv. 11 ff. If it be felt that in the later idealisation, which must\nbe recognised, we lose our knowledge of the _real_ David, it should\nbe remembered that this very idealisation is in itself proof of the\ngreatness of David in mind and soul. The strong but simple faith and\nthe magnanimous bearing of David, which such a passage as the present\nportrays, are no doubt true to fact, for they provide precisely that\nhistorical basis without which the reverent and loving idealisation of\nlater generations had never come into existence.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Then the spirit came\u00b9 upon Amasai, who was chief of the\n thirty\u00b2, _and he said_, Thine are we, David, and on thy side,\n thou son of Jesse: peace, peace be unto thee, and peace be to\n thine helpers; for thy God helpeth thee. Then David received\n them, and made them captains of the band.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _clothed_.\n\n \u00b2 Another reading is, _captains_.\n\n=18.= _the spirit came upon A._] Literally =a spirit= (i.e. from\nGod) =clothed itself with= (i.e. entered into) =Amasai=. Compare\n2 Chronicles xxiv. 20; Judges vi. 34.\n\n_Amasai_] Probably to be identified with \u201cAmasa\u201d (2 Samuel xvii. 25,\nxix. 13).\n\n_chief of the thirty_] Thus the _Keth\u012bb_; the Authorized Version],\nfollowing the _\u1e32er\u012b_, has \u201c_chief of the captains_\u201d; so also xi. 11,\nwhere see note.\n\n_Thine are we, David, and on thy side_] Literally \u201cFor thee, David, and\nwith thee.\u201d This response \u201c_Thine are we ... helpeth thee_\u201d is a fine\nfragment of Hebrew poetry, having an early simplicity of style, which\nit is peculiarly interesting to find in so late a book as Chronicles.\nIt is assuredly not the composition of the Chronicler, but must be\nderived from some independent source, and is perhaps a really old\ntraditional saying about David. See the Introduction \u00a7\u00a05, p. xxxv.\n\n_for thy God helpeth thee_] David\u2019s frequent escapes from Saul were\nfelt to be due to Divine protection.\n\n\n =19\u201222.=\n MANASSITE ADHERENTS.\n\n \u00b9\u2079Of Manasseh also there fell away some to David, when he came\n with the Philistines against Saul to battle, but they helped\n them not: for the lords of the Philistines upon advisement sent\n him away, saying, He will fall away to his master Saul to the\n jeopardy of our heads.\n\n=19.= _when he came with the Philistines_] See 1 Samuel xxviii. 1, 2,\nxxix. 1\u201211.\n\n_but they helped them not_] David\u2019s men did not help the Philistines.\n\n_upon advisement_] \u201cAfter consideration\u201d; literally \u201cby counsel.\u201d\nCompare xxi. 12, \u201cadvise thyself.\u201d\n\n_to the jeopardy of our heads_] Rather, =at the price of our heads=.\nDavid became son-in-law to Saul at the price of the lives of two\nhundred of the Philistines (1 Samuel xviii. 27); their lords here (in\nChronicles) express their dread lest David reconcile himself to Saul by\nsome act of treachery and slaughter done against his present Philistine\npatrons; compare 1 Samuel xxix. 4 (\u201cwith\u201d = \u201cat the price of\u201d).\n\n \u00b2\u2070As he went to Ziklag, there fell to him of Manasseh, Adnah,\n and Jozabad, and Jediael, and Michael, and Jozabad, and Elihu,\n and Zillethai, captains of thousands that were of Manasseh.\n\n=20.= _As he went_] i.e. As he returned (1 Samuel xxx. 1).\n\n_Jozabad_] This name occurs twice; possibly in the original list\ndifferent patronymics were attached to the two mentions of the name.\n\n_captains of thousands_] Compare xv. 25; Micah v. 2. Tribes were\ndivided into \u201cthousands\u201d which were subdivided into \u201chundreds.\u201d These\ndivisions were of civil as well as of military significance.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And they helped David against the band of rovers: for they\n were all mighty men of valour, and were captains in the host.\n\n=21.= _the band of rovers_] The reference is to the Amalekites who\nburnt Ziklag (1 Samuel xxx. 1 ff.). The Hebrew word _g\u0115d\u016bd_, here\ntranslated \u201cband,\u201d is translated \u201ctroop\u201d in 1 Samuel xxx. 8, 15.\n\n_and were captains_] Render, =and they became captains=.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2For from day to day there came to David to help him, until it\n was a great host, like the host of God.\n\n=22.= _the host of God_] The phrase comes from Genesis xxxii. 2;\ncompare Psalms lxviii. 15 (Revised Version) \u201ca mountain of God.\u201d The\nepithet \u201cof God\u201d is used to distinguish a thing as \u201cvery great.\u201d\n\n\n =23\u201240= (compare 2 Samuel v. 1).\n THE FORCES WHICH CAME TO HEBRON TO MAKE DAVID KING.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And these are the numbers of the heads of them that were\n armed for war, which came to David to Hebron, to turn the\n kingdom of Saul to him, according to the word of the LORD.\n\n=23.= _And these are_, etc.] It may confidently be said that the list\nas it stands is the composition of the Chronicler himself, for the\nsyntax and vocabulary of the passage are his, and there is no evidence\nto suggest that its statements are based on those of some ancient\ndocument. Its value in the idealistic account of David which the\nChronicler furnishes is obvious, implying as it does not only that\nthe northern as well as the southern tribes concurred whole-heartedly\nin the election of David, but also that the occasion was one of great\nmilitary display. On the huge numbers alleged to have come from the\nNorth (Zebulun, Naphtali, Dan, and Asher being credited with 155,600\nwarriors) compare the following note, and, in general, on midrashic\nexaggeration of numbers in Chronicles see the note on 2 Chronicles\nxvii. 14.\n\n \u00b2\u2074The children of Judah that bare shield and spear were six\n thousand and eight hundred, armed for war.\n\n=24.= _six thousand and eight hundred_] Contrast the numbers assigned\nto the northern tribes in verses 33 ff. It may be the idea of the\nChronicler that the unanimous support of the southern tribes could be\nassumed, and that only chosen representatives of these tribes attended.\nBut much more probably the multitudes of Zebulun (verse 33), etc.\nare simply due to his desire to magnify the share taken by the north,\nwhilst the problem of the numerical contrast with Judah, etc. did not\npresent itself to him as it does to us.\n\n \u00b2\u2075Of the children of Simeon, mighty men of valour for the war,\n seven thousand and one hundred. \u00b2\u2076Of the children of Levi four\n thousand and six hundred.\n\n=25.= _Simeon_] The most southerly of the tribes (iv. 24\u201231). The\ntribes are mentioned in order from south to north.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And Jehoiada was the leader of _the house of_ Aaron, and with\n him were three thousand and seven hundred;\n\n=27.= _of_ the house of _Aaron_] Jehoiada was not high-priest, but\nleader of the warriors of the house of Aaron. He may be the same person\nas the father of Benaiah (xi. 22). Leader (Hebrew _nag\u012bd_) is the title\ngiven to the \u201cRuler\u201d of the Temple (ix. 11).\n\n \u00b2\u2078and Zadok, a young man mighty of valour, and of his father\u2019s\n house twenty and two captains.\n\n=28.= _Zadok_] In xxvii. 17 he seems to occupy the position assigned to\nJehoiada in verse 27. Perhaps he succeeded him.\n\n \u00b2\u2079And of the children of Benjamin, the brethren of Saul, three\n thousand: for hitherto the greatest part of them had kept\u00b9\n their allegiance to the house of Saul. \u00b3\u2070And of the children of\n Ephraim twenty thousand and eight hundred, mighty men of valour,\n famous men in their fathers\u2019 houses.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _kept the charge of the house_.\n\n=29.= _hitherto_] i.e. up to the time referred to in 2 Samuel v. 1.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And of the half tribe of Manasseh eighteen thousand, which\n were expressed by name, to come and make David king.\n\n=31.= _which were expressed by name_] Suggesting that a census list\nwas kept, recording however not necessarily individuals but simply\nhouseholds. The phrase does not mean picked representatives. Note how\nthe Chronicler skilfully lightens his statistics by some descriptive\nphrase: so also in verses 32 ff.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And of the children of Issachar, men that had understanding\n of the times, to know what Israel ought to do; the heads of\n them were two hundred; and all their brethren were at their\n commandment.\n\n=32.= _that had understanding of the times_] Compare Esther i. 13,\n\u201cwhich knew the times.\u201d \u201cTimes\u201d are \u201copportunities,\u201d \u201cvicissitudes\u201d\n(compare xxix. 30), \u201cexperiences,\u201d good or bad (compare Psalms xxxi.\n15). The phrase means, therefore, \u201cmen of experience, having knowledge\nof the world.\u201d Some suppose that the phrase refers to astrological\nskill (knowledge of auspicious \u201ctimes and seasons\u201d).\n\n \u00b3\u00b3Of Zebulun, such as were able to go out in the host, that\n could set the battle in array, with all manner of instruments of\n war, fifty thousand; and that could order _the battle array, and\n were_ not of double heart. \u00b3\u2074And of Naphtali a thousand captains,\n and with them with shield and spear thirty and seven thousand.\n \u00b3\u2075And of the Danites that could set the battle in array, twenty\n and eight thousand and six hundred. \u00b3\u2076And of Asher, such as were\n able to go out in the host, that could set the battle in array,\n forty thousand.\n\n=33.= _such as were able_, etc.] This description is intended to\nexclude mere lads (such as David appeared to be, 1 Samuel xvii. 33)\nwho might be in attendance on the warriors.\n\n_that could order_, etc.] i.e. who moved as one man in battle array;\ncompare verse 8, note on _shield and spear_. For \u201cof double heart\u201d\ncompare 2 Chronicles xxx. 12, \u201cone heart.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u2077And on the other side of Jordan, of the Reubenites, and the\n Gadites, and of the half tribe of Manasseh, with all manner\n of instruments of war for the battle, an hundred and twenty\n thousand.\n\n=37.= _an hundred and twenty thousand_] Evidently a round number,\ngiving 40,000 to each tribe; compare verse 36.\n\n \u00b3\u2078All these, being men of war, that could order the battle array,\n came with a perfect heart to Hebron, to make David king over\n all Israel: and all the rest also of Israel were of one heart to\n make David king.\n\n=38.= _with a perfect heart_] i.e. with whole, undivided heart.\n\n \u00b3\u2079And they were there with David three days, eating and drinking:\n for their brethren had made preparation for them.\n\n=39.= _eating and drinking_] The feasting probably began with the\nsacrificial meal by which a covenant was usually ratified; compare\nGenesis xxxi. 46, 54.\n\n \u2074\u2070Moreover they that were nigh unto them, _even_ as far as\n Issachar and Zebulun and Naphtali, brought bread on asses, and\n on camels, and on mules, and on oxen, victual of meal, cakes of\n figs, and clusters of raisins, and wine, and oil, and oxen, and\n sheep in abundance: for there was joy in Israel.\n\n=40.= _they that were nigh unto them_] The relatives of the assembled\nwarriors cared for their needs.\n\n_as far as Issachar_] Even those warriors who came from the northern\ndistricts were provisioned by their kinsfolk.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIII.\n\n\n =1\u201214= (= 2 Samuel vi. 1\u201211).\n REMOVAL OF THE ARK FROM KIRIATH-JEARIM TO THE HOUSE\n OF OBED-EDOM. DEATH OF UZZA.\n\nIn harmony with his conviction that the acts of David in promoting\nor instituting the religious ceremonial of Israel were the supremely\nimportant events of his reign, the Chronicler represents the removal\nof the Ark from Kiriath-jearim as being the first concern of the new\nmonarch and his first action subsequent to the capture of Jerusalem.\nDavid\u2019s building of a royal residence for himself and his family in\nJerusalem, and his victories over the Philistines, which in 2 Samuel\n_precede_ the removal of the Ark, are relegated to the second place in\nChronicles (see chapter xiv. ). The transposition of order is effected\nby means of the introductory verses 1\u20124, which are from the\nChronicler\u2019s own hand.\n\nIt is convenient to draw attention here to a matter of some importance\nin the narrative of Chronicles, viz. that the Chronicler believed the\nTabernacle (_Mishk\u0101n_) of the Lord (Exodus xxxv.\u2012xl.) \u201cwhich Moses made\nin the wilderness\u201d (1 Chronicles xxi. 29) to be in existence in David\u2019s\nday and to be standing at Gibeon (see xvi. 39, and 2 Chronicles i. 3).\nYet when the Ark was taken into the city of David it was placed not\nin the _Mishk\u0101n_ but \u201cin the tent (_Ohel_) which David pitched for\nit\u201d (xvi. verse 1 = 2 Samuel vi. 17). Thus in Chronicles the two holy\nthings, the Ark and the Tabernacle, are represented as separated, and\na separate daily service has to be instituted for each; Asaph and his\nbrethren being said to minister before the Ark in the city of David (1\nChronicles xvi. 37), and Zadok and his brethren before the Tabernacle\nat Gibeon (xvi. verse 39). The worship at Gibeon as well as Jerusalem\nentailed a manifest breach of the Deuteronomic law that at one\nsanctuary only must worship be offered. It is hard to say what the\nChronicler thought of David\u2019s strange disregard of a stringent law\nwhich (on the Chronicler\u2019s theory) was well known to David, and which\nthe Chronicler used as one of the criteria distinguishing the good from\nthe evil kings from Solomon onwards. Doubtless David\u2019s ecclesiastical\narrangements were regarded as temporary, pending the building of the\nTemple, but surely the _Mishk\u0101n_ could have been removed to Jerusalem\nalmost as easily as the Ark. Why then does the perfect king fail in\nthis duty? The Chronicler ignores the difficulty completely, probably\nbecause he was unable to see or conjecture any adequate explanation\nof David\u2019s conduct. It goes without saying that in reality the\nDeuteronomic law of the one sanctuary was of much later origin than\nthe time of David, and the difficulty is an unreal one.\n\n \u00b9And David consulted with the captains of thousands and of\n hundreds, even with every leader.\n\n=1.= _David consulted with the captains_, etc.] The Chronicler is fond\nof associating the people with the king in religious measures so as to\nminimise the appearance of arbitrary power which is suggested by the\nlanguage of the books of Samuel and of Kings; compare verse 4 (_the\nassembly said that they would do so_), also 2 Chronicles xxx. 2, 4.\nSimilarly in xxviii. 2 the king addresses the elders as _My brethren_.\nDoubtless the Chronicler had in mind Deuteronomy xvii. 20.\n\n \u00b2And David said unto all the assembly of Israel, If it seem good\n unto you, and if it be of the LORD our God, let us send abroad\n every where unto our brethren that are left in all the land\u00b9 of\n Israel, with\u00b2 whom the priests and Levites are in their cities\n that have suburbs\u00b3, that they may gather themselves unto us: and\n let us bring again the ark of our God to us:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _lands_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _and with them to the priests and Levites which are &c._\n\n \u00b3 Or, _pasture lands_.\n\n=2.= _let us send abroad every where_] The Hebrew phrase is peculiar;\n_let us spread, let us send_, i.e. let the invitation be sent far and\nwide throughout the land and not limited to the southern tribes.\n\n_the priests and Levites_] In Samuel no mention of the Levites is made\nin the account of the removal of the Ark. The Chronicler retells the\nstory in accordance with the conviction that the complete Levitical\nceremonial with which he was familiar was actually in operation in the\ndays of David.\n\n_in their cities that have suburbs_] or, as margin, =... that have\npasture lands=; i.e. following the provision that cities are to be\nassigned to the Levites with \u201csuburbs for their cattle and for their\nsubstance, and for all their beasts\u201d (Numbers xxxv. 2\u20127; compare Joshua\nxiv. 4, xxi. 2).\n\n \u00b3for we sought not unto it in the days of Saul. \u2074And all the\n assembly said that they would do so: for the thing was right in\n the eyes of all the people.\n\n=3.= _we sought not unto it_] The meaning is _to seek with care, to\ncare for_. Compare xv. 13.\n\n \u2075So David assembled all Israel together, from Shihor _the brook_\n of Egypt even unto the entering in of Hamath, to bring the ark\n of God from Kiriath-jearim.\n\n=5.= _from Shihor_ the brook _of Egypt_] _Shihor_ was the name of the\nbrook (now _wady el-Arish_) which divided Palestine from Egypt (Joshua\nxiii. 3, xv. 4; Jeremiah ii. 18).\n\n_the entering in of Hamath_] _Hamath_ (now _Hama_) is on the Orontes,\nsee note on xviii. 5. _The entering in of Hamath_ is to be identified\nwith the Be\u1e33\u0101\u2018a, a broad valley between Lebanon and Anti-Libanus\nwatered by the Orontes, B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 372. It is mentioned\nas on the northern frontier of Israel in Joshua xiii. 5; 1 Kings viii.\n65, and elsewhere.\n\n \u2076And David went up, and all Israel, to Baalah, _that is_, to\n Kiriath-jearim, which belonged to Judah, to bring up from thence\n the ark of God, the LORD that sitteth\u00b9 upon the cherubim, which\u00b2\n is called by the Name.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _dwelleth between_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _where the Name is called on_.\n\n=6.= _to Baalah_, that is, _to Kiriath-jearim_] A Gibeonite city,\nprobably _\u1e32aryet el-\u2018Enab_ (\u201cCity of Grapes\u201d) some 7 miles north-west\nof Jerusalem. Compare Joshua xv. 9; in Joshua xv. 60 _Kiriath-baal_.\n\n_sitteth upon the cherubim_] Compare Ezekiel i. 26.\n\n_which is called by the Name_] The God whose is the Ark is here\ndistinguished from the gods of the nations as the God who bears the\nineffable Name.\n\n \u2077And they carried the ark of God upon a new cart, _and brought\n it_ out of the house of Abinadab: and Uzza and Ahio drave the\n cart.\n\n=7.= _a new cart_] A new cart was chosen as one which had not been\nprofaned by common work. So (Judges xvi. 11, 12) new ropes \u201cwherewith\nno work hath been done\u201d were used in the attempt to bind the\nconsecrated man, Samson. So also (Mark xi. 2, 7) our Lord rode into\nJerusalem on a colt \u201cwhereon no man ever yet sat.\u201d\n\n_the house of Abinadab_] Compare 1 Samuel vii. 1, 2; also 2 Samuel vi.\n3. Here the Ark had been since the Philistines restored it to Israelite\nterritory.\n\n \u2078And David and all Israel played before God with all their might:\n even with songs, and with harps, and with psalteries, and with\n timbrels, and with cymbals, and with trumpets.\n\n=8.= _played_] The Hebrew word means _to sport, to dance_ (compare xv.\n29).\n\n_with all their might: even with songs_] A better reading than that of\n2 Samuel vi. 5, _with all manner of_ instruments made of _fir wood_.\n\n_psalteries_] The instrument here meant (Hebrew _n\u0113bhel_) \u201cis generally\nidentified at the present day with an instrument called the _santir_\nstill in use among the Arabs. This consists of a long box with a flat\nbottom covered with a somewhat convex sounding-board over which the\nstrings are stretched.\u201d (Nowack, _Hebr\u00e4ische Arch\u00e4ologie_, I. 275.)\nThe \u201charp\u201d (Hebrew _kinn\u014dr_) was a simpler instrument (like the Greek\n_Kithara_), a _lyre_ rather than a true harp.\n\nFor a full discussion of _n\u0113bhel_ and _kinn\u014dr_ see Driver, _Amos_,\np. 234, or the articles _Music_ in _Encyclopedia Biblia_ or Hastings\u2019\n_Dictionary of the Bible_.\n\n \u2079And when they came unto the threshing-floor of Chidon, Uzza put\n forth his hand to hold the ark; for the oxen stumbled\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _were restive_ Or, _threw_ it _down_.\n\n=9.= _the threshing-floor of Chidon_] LXX. (B) omits _of Chidon_. In 2\nSamuel vi. 6, _Nacon\u2019s threshing-floor_. Nacon is probably a textual\nblunder.\n\n_to hold the ark_] The Chronicler from a feeling of reverence shrinks\nfrom saying, _and took hold of it_ (2 Samuel vi. 6).\n\n_stumbled_] margin _threw_ it _down_, but the meaning is perhaps rather,\n_let it go_, i.e. let the cart on which the Ark was slip backwards.\nThe same Hebrew word is used 2\u00a0Kings ix. 33; there Jehu in his mocking\nhumour says not, _Throw her down_, but, _Let her go_, an ambiguous\ncommand meant to throw as much responsibility as possible upon those\nwho obeyed it.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzza, and he\n smote him, because he put forth his hand to the ark: and there\n he died before God.\n\n=10.= _before God_] In 2 Samuel vi. 7, _by the ark of God_.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And David was displeased, because the LORD had broken forth\n upon Uzza: and he called that place Perez-uzza\u00b9, unto this day.\n \u00b9\u00b2And David was afraid of God that day, saying, How shall I\n bring the ark of God home to me?\n\n \u00b9 That is, _The breach of Uzza_.\n\n=11.= _was displeased_] Rather, =was wroth=, presumably against his\nadvisers for not warning him that the method adopted for the removal\nof the Ark was wrong; compare xv. 13.\n\n_had broken forth_] Literally as Authorized Version, _had made a breach\nupon Uzza_. Compare Exodus xix. 22.\n\n_Perez-uzza_] The meaning of the name is given by the margin _The\nbreach of Uzza._\n\n \u00b9\u00b3So David removed not the ark unto him into the city of David,\n but carried it aside into the house of Obed-edom the Gittite.\n\n=13.= _Obed-edom the Gittite_] As _Gittite_ means man of Gath,\nObed-edom was doubtless of Philistine origin; perhaps he attached\nhimself to David during David\u2019s sojourn among the Philistines. In xv.\n18, 24, xvi. 38, xxvi. 4 an Obed-edom is mentioned as a Levite and a\nporter (doorkeeper) for the Ark, and elsewhere (xv. 21, xvi. 5) as a\nsinger (see the notes on xv. 18, and xvi. 38).\n\n \u00b9\u2074And the ark of God remained with the family of Obed-edom\n in his house three months: and the LORD blessed the house of\n Obed-edom, and all that he had.\n\n=14.= _with the family of Obed-edom in his house_] Render, =by=\n(i.e. near) =the house of Obed-edom in its own house=. The Chronicler\n(regarding Obed-edom as a foreigner if not also an idolater) finds\nit necessary to alter the expression found in 2 Samuel vi. 11, \u201cin\nthe house of Obed-edom the Gittite.\u201d (On the significance of the\nname\u2015\u2015literally _servant of Edom_\u2015\u2015see Driver, _Samuel_\u00b2, pp. 268, 269.)\n\n_blessed_] Targum _blessed with sons and sons\u2019 sons_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIV.\n\n\n (= 2 Samuel v. 11\u201225).\n DAVID AT JERUSALEM. TWO PHILISTINE ATTACKS REPULSED.\n\nThe Chronicler derives this chapter from Samuel but gives it in a\nsetting of his own. To agree with Samuel it should immediately follow\n1\u00a0Chronicles xi. 9 and should immediately precede 1 Chronicles xiii. 1.\nIn Samuel the two attempts to remove the Ark to the city of David, the\nfirst unsuccessful, the second successful, are related in immediate\nsuccession; the Chronicler interposes between them the double repulse\nof the Philistines. See the head-note to chapter xiii.\n\n\n =1, 2.=\n HIRAM\u2019S [FIRST] EMBASSY TO DAVID.\n\nThe dislocation of the narrative mentioned in the last note has\nconcealed the occasion of Hiram\u2019s embassy. The narrative of 2 Samuel\nv. 9\u201211 suggests that Hiram heard of the building works which David was\ncarrying on at Jerusalem and so sent materials and workmen to assist.\nDavid accepted the welcome offer (which ultimately led to an alliance)\nas a sign of Divine favour.\n\n \u00b9And Hiram king of Tyre sent messengers to David, and cedar\n trees, and masons, and carpenters, to build him an house. \u00b2And\n David perceived that the LORD had established him king over\n Israel, for his kingdom was exalted on high, for his people\n Israel\u2019s sake.\n\n=1.= _Hiram_] Other forms of this name are _Huram_ and (1 Kings v. 10,\n18) _Hirom_.\n\n\n =3\u20127= (= iii. 5\u20128 and 2 Samuel v. 13\u201216).\n DAVID\u2019S FAMILY IN JERUSALEM.\n\n \u00b3And David took more wives at Jerusalem: and David begat more\n sons and daughters.\n\n=3.= _more wives_] In 2 Samuel v. 13 _more concubines and wives_. The\nChronicler omits or modifies statements which tend to David\u2019s discredit.\n\n \u2074And these are the names of the children which he had in\n Jerusalem; Shammua, and Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon; \u2075and Ibhar,\n and Elishua, and Elpelet; \u2076and Nogah, and Nepheg, and Japhia;\n \u2077and Elishama, and Beeliada, and Eliphelet.\n\n=4.= _these are the names_] The names seem better preserved here than\nin either of the parallel passages; compare notes on iii. 5\u20128.\n\n_Shammua ... Solomon_] All these four are attributed to Bath-shua\n(= Bath-sheba) in iii. 5.\n\n\n =8\u201217= (= 2 Samuel v. 17\u201225).\n THE DOUBLE REPULSE OF THE PHILISTINES.\n\n \u2078And when the Philistines heard that David was anointed king\n over all Israel, all the Philistines went up to seek David: and\n David heard of it, and went out against\u00b9 them.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _before_.\n\n=8.= _over all Israel_] in 2 Samuel v. 17, _over Israel_. In both\npassages the reference is to the later anointing by the whole people\n(2 Samuel v. 3).\n\n_all the Philistines_] David, as king of Judah, was of little or no\npolitical importance to the Philistines; as king of united Israel, he\nbecame a possible menace, and was accordingly attacked without delay.\n\n_went up_] i.e. from their own low-lying territory by the sea into the\nhill-country of Judah.\n\n_went out against them_] margin =went out before them=, i.e.\nanticipated them, did not wait for them to attack him. In 2 Samuel v.\n17 _went down to the hold_, an expression which might refer to some\npart of the difficult hill-country of Judah in which he had long defied\nSaul, or may mean the \u201chold\u201d of Jerusalem, which David had seized from\nthe Jebusites (see note on xi. 5).\n\n \u2079Now the Philistines had come and made a raid in the valley of\n Rephaim.\n\n=9.= _the valley of Rephaim_] probably the shallow valley, now called\nBe\u1e33\u0101\u2018a, across which runs the road from Jerusalem to Beth-lehem\n(B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, pp. 15, 99).\n\n \u00b9\u2070And David inquired of God, saying, Shall I go up against the\n Philistines? and wilt thou deliver them into mine hand? And the\n LORD said unto him, Go up; for I will deliver them into thine\n hand.\n\n=10.= _inquired of God_] doubtless by means of the sacred lot, the\nUrim and Thummim (see Hastings\u2019 _Dictionary of the Bible_ _s.v._, and\nKirkpatrick\u2019s notes on 1 Samuel x. 22, xxiii. 6).\n\n \u00b9\u00b9So they came up to Baal-perazim, and David smote them there;\n and David said, God hath broken\u00b9 mine enemies by mine hand, like\n the breach of waters. Therefore they called the name of that\n place Baal-perazim\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _broken forth upon mine enemies_.\n\n \u00b2 That is, _The place of breakings forth_.\n\n=11.= _Baal-perazim_] probably to be identified with the _Mount\nPerazim_ of Isaiah xxviii. 21, but the situation is unknown.\n\n_like the breach of waters_] i.e. like the breach made by waters,\nProbably the scene of the victory was a hill deeply scarred with\nwatercourses. The force with which God broke through the army of the\nPhilistines is compared with that of a torrent bursting forth from the\nhill-side or forcing its way through all obstacles. _Baal-perazim_ =\nthe Lord of breakings forth, i.e. upon the foe.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And they left their gods there; and David gave commandment,\n and they were burned with fire.\n\n=12.= _David gave commandment, and they were burned_] In 2 Samuel v. 21\n(Revised Version) _David and his men took them away_. The Chronicler\nalters this statement so as to make David\u2019s conduct agree with the Law\n(Deuteronomy vii. 5, 25) which enjoined that graven images were to be\nburnt with fire.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And the Philistines yet again made a raid in the valley.\n\n=13.= _yet again_] This invasion of \u201call the Philistines\u201d (verse 8) was\ntoo serious to be repelled by a single defeat.\n\n_in the valley_] in 2 Samuel v. 22, _in the valley of Rephaim_, as in\nverse 9 above.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And David inquired again of God; and God said unto him, Thou\n shalt not go up after them: turn away from them, and come upon\n them over against the mulberry\u00b9 trees.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _balsam trees_.\n\n=14.= _Thou shalt not go up after them_] In 2 Samuel v. 23 the words\n_after them_ are connected with the following verb: _Thou shalt not go\nup: make a circuit behind them_. In Samuel the command is to assail the\nrear of the enemy, in Chronicles to avoid the rear (which was perhaps\nprotected by a rear-guard) and to attack (presumably) the flank. The\nreading in Chronicles is to be preferred as a harder reading, which\nyields good sense on examination.\n\n_from them_] The Hebrew word suggests that David occupied a commanding\nposition from which he would be tempted to attack.\n\n_over against the mulberry trees_] Render, =along, parallel to=. The\nline of David\u2019s attack is to be parallel to a line of mulberry trees\n(or to a ridge on which mulberry trees stood) situate probably at right\nangles to the line of the Philistine march. Thus David\u2019s advance would\nbe concealed from the Philistines until the very moment of the attack,\nwhich would fall on the flank of the Philistine march.\n\n_mulberry trees_] or, as margin, =balsam trees=. Some kind of tree or\nshrub from which gum exudes seems to be meant.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And it shall be, when thou hearest the sound of marching in\n the tops of the mulberry trees, that then thou shalt go out to\n battle: for God is gone out before thee to smite the host of the\n Philistines.\n\n=15.= _the sound of marching_] the sound of the wind in the trees is to\nbe taken as an omen from Jehovah, indicating the favourable moment for\nthe assault. The Targum, characteristically, _has the sound of angels\ncoming to thy help_.\n\n_thou shalt go out to battle_] Samuel has a more vivid phrase, _thou\nshalt bestir thyself_.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And David did as God commanded him: and they smote the host\n of the Philistines from Gibeon\u00b9 even to Gezer. \u00b9\u2077And the fame of\n David went out into all lands; and the LORD brought the fear of\n him upon all nations.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel v. 25, _Geba_.\n\n=16.= _smote the host of the Philistines from Gibeon even to Gezer_]\nThis victory was decisive; the main army of the Philistines was routed.\n\n_Gezer_] compare vi. 67, note.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XV.\n\n\n =1\u201224.=\n DAVID\u2019S PREPARATIONS FOR BRINGING THE ARK TO JERUSALEM.\n\nThere is no parallel in Samuel to this section.\n\nIn 2 Samuel vi. 12 the reason given for the renewal of David\u2019s attempt\nto bring the Ark to Jerusalem is the report of the blessing which was\nsaid to have befallen Obed-edom, in whose house the Ark had been left.\nThe Chronicler is not ignorant of this tradition since he refers to it\nincidentally in xiii. 14, but it would be very far from his sense of\nthe fitness of things to adduce it as the motive for David\u2019s action.\nOn the contrary he declares in this section that David was prompted\nby a realisation that the ill-success of the first attempt was due to\nfailure to observe the regulations of the Levitical Law. Full attention\nnow being given to the prescribed ritual, David succeeds in his pious\npurpose.\n\n \u00b9And _David_ made him houses in the city of David; and he\n prepared a place for the ark of God, and pitched for it a tent.\n\n=1.= _made him houses_] Compare 2 Samuel v. 9.\n\n_a tent_] a new tent, not the old tabernacle which the Chronicler\nbelieved to be at Gibeon (see xvi. 39).\n\n \u00b2Then David said, None ought to carry the ark of God but the\n Levites: for them hath the LORD chosen to carry the ark of God,\n and to minister unto him for ever.\n\n=2.= _None ... but the Levites_] Numbers i. 50, vii. 9. Nothing is said\nin the parallel place (2 Samuel vi. 13) of the Levites, but bearers\n(and not a cart) are spoken of with regard to this second attempt.\nCompare 2 Chronicles v. 4, note.\n\n \u00b3And David assembled all Israel at Jerusalem, to bring up the\n ark of the LORD unto its place, which he had prepared for it.\n \u2074And David gathered together the sons of Aaron, and the Levites:\n\n=3.= _assembled all Israel_] It was a solemn religious _assembly_\n(Hebrew _\u1e32\u0101h\u0101l_, Greek \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1).\n\n \u2075of the sons of Kohath; Uriel the chief, and his brethren an\n hundred and twenty: \u2076of the sons of Merari; Asaiah the chief,\n and his brethren two hundred and twenty: \u2077of the sons of Gershom;\n Joel the chief, and his brethren an hundred and thirty: \u2078of\n the sons of Elizaphan; Shemaiah the chief, and his brethren\n two hundred: \u2079of the sons of Hebron; Eliel the chief, and his\n brethren fourscore: \u00b9\u2070of the sons of Uzziel; Amminadab the chief,\n and his brethren an hundred and twelve.\n\n=5\u201210.= Remark that besides the three great Levitical divisions,\nKohathites, Gershonites, and Merarites, three additional classes (sons\nof Elizaphan, of Hebron, and of Uzziel) are given in verses 8\u201210. This\nunusual sixfold division, and the smallness of the numbers of Levites\nhave been taken as indicating that the whole passage xv. 1\u201215 is drawn\nby the Chronicler from an earlier source, but the argument is not\nconvincing. \u201cThe text does not imply that Elizaphan, Hebron, and Uzziel\nwere coordinated with Kohath, Gershom, and Merari\u201d; and the small\nnumbers are accounted for by the view that only selected Levites were\nchosen for the task (so Curtis, _Chronicles_, p. 127).\n\n=5.= _the sons of Kohath; Uriel_] Kohath had four sons (Exodus vi.\n18 = 1 Chronicles vi. 18): Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. Here\nthe descendants of Amram (exclusive of the priests, the Aaronites)\nrepresented by Uriel head the list (verse 5), and the descendants\nof Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel appear in verses 8, 9, 10 respectively.\n_Elizaphan_ (verse 8) either stands for the _Izhar_ of Exodus vi. 18,\nor is the name of some prominent descendant of Izhar after whom the\nwhole family was named. He is mentioned again in 2 Chronicles xxix. 13.\nAs regards number the Kohathites were 512 against 350 of the sons of\nMerari and the sons of Gershom combined. In vi. 60\u201263 (45\u201248, Hebrew)\n23 cities are reckoned to Kohath against 25 to Merari and Gershom\ncombined. The Kohathites formed the largest and most important of the\nthree divisions of the Levites.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And David called for Zadok and Abiathar the priests, and for\n the Levites, for Uriel, Asaiah, and Joel, Shemaiah, and Eliel,\n and Amminadab,\n\n=11.= _Zadok and Abiathar_] This double priesthood (2 Samuel viii. 17,\nxv. 29, 35, xix. 11, xx. 25) came to an end in the reign of Solomon (1\nKings ii. 27, 35). _Zadok_ is always mentioned first as being descended\nfrom Eleazar the third son of Aaron, while Ithamar from whom _Abiathar_\n(Ahimelech) was descended through Eli (1 Kings ii. 27) was the fourth\nson (xxiv. 1, 3). In two of the passages quoted in this note _Abiathar_\n(probably being confused with his father) is called _Ahimelech_ or\n_Abimelech_ (2 Samuel viii. 17 = 1 Chronicles xviii. 16; 1 Chronicles\nxxiv. 3). Conversely in Mark ii. 26 _Ahimelech_ is called _Abiathar_.\nIn the Chronicler\u2019s list of high-priests (vi. 4\u201214) _Zadok_ alone is\nmentioned, the line of Eleazar alone being given.\n\n_the priests_] Only the two chief priests are mentioned here. Other\npriests blew with the trumpets in front of the Ark (verse 24).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2and said unto them, Ye are the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_\n of the Levites: sanctify yourselves, both ye and your brethren,\n that ye may bring up the ark of the LORD, the God of Israel,\n unto _the place_ that I have prepared for it.\n\n=12.= _sanctify yourselves_] Compare 2 Chronicles xxix. 5. For the\nmethod of sanctifying compare Exodus xix. 10, 15.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3For because ye _bare it_ not at the first, the LORD our God\n made a breach upon us, for that we sought him not according\n to the ordinance. \u00b9\u2074So the priests and the Levites sanctified\n themselves to bring up the ark of the LORD, the God of Israel.\n\n=13.= _made a breach_] xiii. 11, xiv. 11 (compare margin).\n\n_we sought him not_] i.e. God; but a better rendering is =we sought not\nunto it=. Compare note on xiii. 3.\n\n_according to the ordinance_] For its observance, see verse 15.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the children of the Levites bare the ark of God upon their\n shoulders with the staves thereon, as Moses commanded according\n to the word of the LORD.\n\n=15.= _the children of the Levites bare ... upon their shoulders_] in\naccordance with the regulation of Numbers i. 50, vii. 9, which was not\nobserved in the first attempt when the Ark was placed in a cart, xiii.\n7.\n\n_the staves_] Exodus xxv. 13, 14.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And David spake to the chief of the Levites to appoint their\n brethren the singers, with instruments of music, psalteries and\n harps and cymbals, sounding aloud and lifting up the voice with\n joy.\n\n=16.= _psalteries_] See note on xiii. 8.\n\n \u00b9\u2077So the Levites appointed Heman the son of Joel; and of his\n brethren, Asaph the son of Berechiah; and of the sons of Merari\n their brethren, Ethan the son of Kushaiah;\n\n=17.= _Heman the son of Joel_] a descendant of Samuel the prophet; vi.\n33 (vi. 18, Hebrew). Compare Psalms lxxxviii. (title). As _Heman_ was\ndescended from Kohath, _Asaph_ from Gershom, and _Ethan_ from Merari,\neach division of the Levites was represented by a chief musician.\n_Heman_ was king\u2019s seer (xxv. 5).\n\n_Asaph the son of Berechiah_] a descendant of Gershom; vi. 39\u201243 (24\u201228,\nHebrew). Asaph was the chief of the musicians; xvi. 5, 7. One of the\nsmall collections of Psalms from which our Psalter was compiled was\nnamed after him; compare the titles of Psalms l., lxxiii.\u2012lxxxiii.\n\n_Ethan the son of Kushaiah_] a descendant of Merari; vi. 44\u201247. Compare\nPsalms lxxxix. (title). He is apparently called _Jeduthun_ in xxv. 1\u20126.\nSee also the note on xvi. 41.\n\n=18\u201224.= These verses present several obscurities which can hardly\nbe explained except by the supposition that the original text of the\nChronicler has been added to by a later writer with intricate results.\nSeveral reconstructions are possible, the most plausible being that of\nCurtis which is followed in these notes.\n\n \u00b9\u2078and with them their brethren of the second degree, Zechariah,\n Ben, and Jaaziel, and Shemiramoth, and Jehiel, and Unni, Eliab,\n and Benaiah, and Maaseiah, and Mattithiah, and Eliphelehu, and\n Mikneiah, and Obed-edom, and Jeiel, the doorkeepers.\n\n=18.= _their brethren of the second degree_] Read rather =their twelve\nbrethren=: twelve being the number of names from Zechariah to Mikneiah.\nThe last two, Obed-edom and Jeiel, were \u201cdoorkeepers,\u201d not \u201csingers,\u201d\nalthough they were mistakenly supposed to belong to the list of singers\nby the author of verses 19\u201221 (see further regarding Obed-edom the note\non xvi. 38).\n\n_Ben_] This word, which means \u201cson,\u201d is an error. Read probably =Bani=.\n\n_the doorkeepers_] See the notes on ix. 17.\n\n \u00b9\u2079So the singers, Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, _were appointed_,\n with cymbals of brass to sound aloud;\n\n=19\u201221.= Probably an addition interpolated by someone interested in the\ndetailed organisation of the Levitical choirs. The names are taken from\nverse 18, except that _Ben_ is omitted, and a new name Azaziah is added\nat the end of the list. Since Obed-edom and Jeiel are included among\nthe singers here, the reading \u201cof the second degree\u201d (which is regarded\nabove as an error for an original \u201ctwelve\u201d: a slight change in Hebrew)\nmust have been found in the text of verse 18 which the interpolator\nused.\n\n_to sound aloud_] The cymbals mark the time for the other instruments.\n\n \u00b2\u2070and Zechariah, and Aziel, and Shemiramoth, and Jehiel, and\n Unni, and Eliab, and Maaseiah, and Benaiah, with psalteries set\n to Alamoth;\n\n=20.= _set to Alamoth_] an obscure phrase, its musical significance\nbeing uncertain; compare Psalms xlvi. (title), Revised Version.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9and Mattithiah, and Eliphelehu, and Mikneiah, and Obed-edom,\n and Jeiel, and Azaziah, with harps set to the Sheminith, to lead.\n\n=21.= _set to the Sheminith_] As in the case of _Alamoth_, the precise\nmusical significance of _Sheminith_ is obscure. Compare Psalms vi.\n(title, Revised Version margin).\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Chenaniah, chief of the Levites, was over the song\u00b9: he\n instructed about the song\u00b9, because he was skilful.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the carrying_ of the ark Hebrew _the lifting up_.\n\n=22.= _was over the song_] The Hebrew word (_massa_) here twice\nrendered \u201csong\u201d means \u201cuplifting,\u201d either of the voice in song, or in a\nphysical sense = \u201cburden\u201d; hence margin _was over the carrying_ of the\nark.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And Berechiah and Elkanah were doorkeepers for the ark.\n\n=23.= _were doorkeepers for the ark_] The same statement is made in\nverse 24 concerning _Obed-edom_ and _Jehiah_ (= Jeiel)! On Curtis\u2019 view,\nthis verse was added by the same writer as verses 19\u201221, who, having\ntaken Obed-edom and Jeiel as part of the list of singers in verse 18\nno doubt thought that the names of the doorkeepers (the last word of\nverse 18) had somehow been omitted. He supplied therefore here the\nnames Berechiah and Elkanah (taken perhaps from ix. 16). A still later\nwriter has attempted to put matters straight by further adding at\nthe conclusion of verse 24 \u201cand Obed-edom and Jehiah (Jeiel) were\ndoorkeepers for the ark.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u2074And Shebaniah, and Joshaphat, and Nethanel, and Amasai, and\n Zechariah, and Benaiah, and Eliezer, the priests, did blow with\n the trumpets before the ark of God: and Obed-edom and Jehiah\n were doorkeepers for the ark.\n\n=24.= _the priests_] In Numbers x. 1\u201210 it is enjoined to make two\nsilver trumpets to be blown by the priests on days of joy and on\nfeast-days. This festal trumpet was different from the \u201ccornet\u201d (verse\n28), properly a ram\u2019s horn, which was freely used for secular purposes.\nSee Driver, _Amos_, pp. 144 ff. (with illustrations).\n\n\n =25\u2012XVI. 3= (compare 2 Samuel vi. 12\u201220).\n THE BRINGING HOME OF THE ARK. MICHAL DESPISES DAVID.\n\n\u00b2\u2075So David, and the elders of Israel, and the captains over thousands,\nwent to bring up the ark of the covenant of the LORD out of the house\nof Obed-edom with joy: \u00b2\u2076and it came to pass, when God helped the\nLevites that bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, that they\nsacrificed seven bullocks and seven rams.\n\n=26.= _when God helped the Levites_] In 2 Samuel vi. 13, _when they\nthat bare the ark of the Lord had gone six paces_. The Chronicler\ninterprets the safe start as a sign of Divine assistance.\n\n_seven bullocks and seven rams_] In Samuel _an ox and a fatling_ (so\nRevised Version, not, _oxen and fatlings_ as Authorized Version). The\nsmaller sacrifice of Samuel is represented as the king\u2019s own offering,\nthe larger sacrifice of Chronicles as that of the king and his elders\ncombined.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And David was clothed with a robe of fine linen, and all the\n Levites that bare the ark, and the singers, and Chenaniah the\n master of the song\u00b9 _with_ the singers: and David had upon him\n an ephod of linen.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the carrying_ of the ark Hebrew _the lifting up_.\n\n=27.= _of the song_] margin, _of the carrying_ of the ark. Compare\nverse 22, note.\n\n_an ephod of linen_] worn exceptionally by David for the purpose of\nthe religious procession. A linen ephod was the ordinary vestment for\nall priests (1 Samuel xxii. 18). The high-priest\u2019s ephod was a more\nelaborate garment (Exodus xxviii. 6\u201212), fitted with the means of\ndivination (1 Samuel xxiii. 6, 9\u201212).\n\n \u00b2\u2078Thus all Israel brought up the ark of the covenant of the LORD\n with shouting, and with sound of the cornet, and with trumpets,\n and with cymbals, sounding aloud with psalteries and harps.\n\n=28.= _with shouting_] The Hebrew word (_t\u0115r\u016b\u2018ah_) is technical in the\nsense of _a blast_ with the festal trumpets (Numbers x. 1\u201210), and in\nthis sense it should be taken here, since the Chronicler has expanded\nthe account given in Samuel by introducing a mention of these trumpets.\n\n \u00b2\u2079And it came to pass, as the ark of the covenant of the LORD\n came to the city of David, that Michal the daughter of Saul\n looked out at the window, and saw king David dancing and playing;\n and she despised him in her heart.\n\n=29.= _playing_] a synonym of _dancing_, obsolete in modern English.\nThe closest rendering is perhaps, =leaping as in sport=. The\nunrestrained joyousness of this action might easily degenerate (as in\nidolatrous worship) into licence. The Chronicler omits to say that the\ndancing was \u201cbefore the Lord\u201d (2 Samuel vi. 16). David\u2019s subsequent\ninterview with Michal (2 Samuel vi. verses 20\u201223) is also passed over\nin Chronicles.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVI.\n\n\n \u00b9And they brought in the ark of God, and set it in the midst of\n the tent that David had pitched for it: and they offered burnt\n offerings and peace offerings before God.\n\n=1.= _the tent_] Compare xv. 1, note.\n\n_they offered_] In 2 Samuel vi. 17, _David offered_. The Chronicler\nassociates the elders with David as in xv. 26.\n\n_burnt offerings_] Compare Leviticus i. 1\u20129.\n\n_peace offerings_] The \u201cpeace offering\u201d (Hebrew _shelem_) was a\nthank-offering or an offering made in expiation of a vow; compare\nProverbs vii. 14.\n\n \u00b2And when David had made an end of offering the burnt offering\n and the peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of\n the LORD.\n\n=2.= _blessed the people_] Compare 2 Chronicles vi. 3.\n\n \u00b3And he dealt to every one of Israel, both man and woman, to\n every one a loaf of bread, and a portion _of flesh_\u00b9, and a cake\n of raisins.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _of wine_.\n\n=3.= _a loaf of bread_] A flat round cake such as is still made in\nEgypt is meant.\n\n_a portion_ of flesh] margin \u201cof wine.\u201d The meaning of the Hebrew word\nis unknown. _Of flesh_ is rightly in italics here as in 2 Samuel vi. 19.\n\n_a cake of raisins_] Compare Isaiah xvi. 7 (Revised Version) where the\nsame Hebrew word is used.\n\n\n =4\u20126= (compare verses 37, 38).\n DAVID\u2019S ARRANGEMENTS FOR MINISTRATION BEFORE THE ARK.\n\n \u2074And he appointed certain of the Levites to minister before\n the ark of the LORD, and to celebrate and to thank and praise\n the LORD, the God of Israel:\n\n=4.= _to celebrate_] The literal meaning is _to call to mind_; compare\nverse 12 (_remember_). Compare Psalms xxxviii., lxx. (titles).\n\n \u2075Asaph the chief, and second to him Zechariah, Jeiel\u00b9, and\n Shemiramoth, and Jehiel, and Mattithiah, and Eliab, and Benaiah,\n and Obed-edom, and Jeiel, with psalteries and with harps; and\n Asaph with cymbals, sounding aloud;\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xv. 18, _Jaaziel_.\n\n=5.= _Asaph_] Compare xv. 17, note.\n\n_and Obed-edom_] It is possible that the names Obed-edom, and Jeiel\nand Asaph (in the latter part of the verse) have been inserted by the\ninterpolator who wrote xv. 19\u201221 and wished to accommodate these verses\nto the altered text in chapter xv.\n\n \u2076and Benaiah and Jahaziel the priests with trumpets continually,\n before the ark of the covenant of God.\n\n=6.= _Benaiah and Jahaziel_] Two priests for the two trumpets.\n\n_Benaiah_] In xxvii. 5, 6 a _Benaiah_ son of Jehoiada the priest\n(Revised Version) is mentioned who may possibly be identified with the\nBenaiah who was one of the thirty heroes (xi. 24, 25). Compare also\nxii. 27.\n\n\n =7\u201236.=\n THE PSALM OF PRAISE.\n\n \u2077Then on that day did David first ordain\u00b9 to give thanks unto\n the LORD, by the hand of Asaph and his brethren.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _make it the chief work_.\n\nThe psalm which follows consists of Psalms cv. 1\u201215, Psalms xcvi.\n1b\u201213a, Psalms cvi. 1, 47, 48. It has been compiled from the Psalms\njust mentioned and placed here as an utterance such as would be\nappropriate to the situation. For detailed criticism as to the original\nform and present text of these Psalms, the reader must be referred to\nthe commentaries on the Psalter. Only such comment is here given as\nseems called for in their present setting.\n\n\n =8\u201222= (= Psalms cv. 1\u201215).\n\n \u2078O give thanks unto the LORD, call upon his name;\n Make known his doings among the peoples.\n\n=8, 9.= These verses are perhaps based upon Isaiah xii. 4, 5.\n\n \u2079Sing unto him, sing praises unto him;\n Talk\u00b9 ye of all his marvellous works.\n \u00b9\u2070Glory ye in his holy name:\n Let the heart of them rejoice that seek the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Meditate_.\n\n=9.= _Talk ye_] margin _Meditate_. Meditation leads to fresh\nproclamation.\n\n_marvellous works_] (compare verse 12). i.e. works beyond man\u2019s\nexpectation; compare Genesis xviii. 14, _Is anything too hard_\n(_wonderful_, Revised Version margin) _for the LORD?_\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Seek ye the LORD and his strength;\n Seek his face evermore.\n\n=11.= _and his strength_] Perhaps (altering only the points of the\nHebrew word) =and be ye strong=. So LXX. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 (in Psalms cv. 4\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5). A promise is sometimes expressed in Hebrew by the\nimperative.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Remember his marvellous works that he hath done;\n His wonders, and the judgements of his mouth;\n\n=12.= _His wonders_] in particular, the marvels of the deliverance from\nEgypt; Psalms cv. 27\u201236.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3O ye seed of Israel his servant,\n Ye children of Jacob, his chosen ones.\n\n=13.= _of Israel_] Psalms cv. 6, _of Abraham_.\n\n \u00b9\u2074He is the LORD our God:\n His judgements are in all the earth.\n\n=14.= _His judgements are in all the earth_] Compare verses 20\u201222.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Remember his covenant for ever,\n The word which he commanded to a thousand generations;\n \u00b9\u2076_The covenant_ which he made with Abraham,\n And his oath unto Isaac;\n \u00b9\u2077And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a statute,\n To Israel for an everlasting covenant:\n\n=15.= _Remember_] Read (with Psalms cv. 8) =He hath remembered=.\nCompare Exodus xxiv. 3\u20128, xxxiv. 10\u201227.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan,\n The lot\u00b9 of your inheritance:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _cord_, or, _line_.\n\n=18.= _The lot_] The Hebrew word (\u201c_\u1e25ebel_\u201d) means _a portion_ not\n_assigned by lot_ but _measured by line_; compare margin Canaan is\nco-extensive with Israel\u2019s inheritance.\n\n_inheritance_] All nations receive an inheritance from God; Deuteronomy\nxxxii. 8.\n\n \u00b9\u2079When ye were but a few men in number;\n Yea, very few, and sojourners in it;\n\n=19.= _When ye were_] Psalms cv. 12, _When they were_.\n\n_sojourners_] The patriarchs were not simply _strangers_, but strangers\nwho made a long _sojourn_ in Canaan.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And they went about from nation to nation,\n And from one kingdom to another people.\n\n=20.= _kingdom ... people_] The \u201ckingdom\u201d is Egypt (Genesis xii.); the\n\u201cpeople\u201d the Canaanite and Perizzite (Genesis xiii.).\n\n \u00b2\u00b9He suffered no man to do them wrong;\n Yea, he reproved kings for their sakes;\n\n=21.= _he reproved kings_] Genesis xx. 3\u20127.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2_Saying_, Touch not mine anointed ones,\n And do my prophets no harm.\n\n=22.= _my prophets_] Genesis xx. 7.\n\n\n =23\u201233= (= Psalms xcvi. 1\u201213).\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Sing unto the LORD, all the earth;\n Shew forth his salvation from day to day.\n \u00b2\u2074Declare his glory among the nations,\n His marvellous works among all the peoples.\n\n=23.= _Sing unto the LORD_] In Psalms xcvi. 1, 2 this exhortation is\nthrice repeated; in Chronicles it is once given. Note that verse 2a of\nthe Psalm is also omitted here.\n\n \u00b2\u2075For great is the LORD, and highly to be praised:\n He also is to be feared above all gods.\n\n=25.= _to be feared above all gods_] i.e. to be feared as being above\nall \u201cthat are called gods,\u201d these being \u201cthings of nought\u201d (verse 26,\nRevised Version margin). The real existence of false gods is not\nassumed.\n\n \u00b2\u2076For all the gods of the peoples are idols\u00b9:\n But the LORD made the heavens.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _things of nought_.\n\n=26.= _made the heavens_] A fine epithet. Compare Jeremiah x. 11, _The\ngods that have not made the heavens ... shall perish from the earth_.\n\n \u00b2\u2077Honour and majesty are before him:\n Strength and gladness are in his place.\n\n=27.= _are before him_] i.e. are His, belong to Him as His attributes.\nPerhaps also _before him_ refers to God\u2019s abode in heaven, while the\nparallel expression _in his place_ (Psalms xcvi. 6, _in his sanctuary_)\nrefers to His temple on earth.\n\n_Strength and gladness_] Psalms xcvi. 6, _Strength and beauty_. The\nreference seems to be to the _strength and gladness_ (or _beauty_)\nwhich God bestows on Israel (Psalms lxviii. 35; Isaiah lxi. 3).\n\n_in his place_] Read with Psalms xcvi. 6, =in his sanctuary=. Compare\nthe two preceding notes.\n\n \u00b2\u2078Give unto the LORD, ye kindreds of the peoples,\n Give unto the LORD glory and strength.\n\n=28.= _of the peoples_] An expectation that the Gentiles will turn\nto the worship of the true God is expressed not rarely in the Psalms;\ncompare Psalms xxii. 27, Psalms lxviii. 31, 32; and is, of course, one\nof the greatest contributions of Old Testament faith to the religious\naspirations of humanity.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name:\n Bring an offering, and come before him:\n Worship the LORD in the beauty\u00b9 of holiness.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in holy array_.\n\n=29.= _before him_] Psalms xcvi. 8, _into his courts_.\n\n_Worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness_] Render as margin,\n=worship the Lord in holy attire= (see Kirkpatrick on Psalms xxix. 2,\nPsalms xcvi. 9; and compare Exodus xxviii. 2). Compare 2 Chronicles\nxx. 21.\n\n \u00b3\u2070Tremble before him, all the earth:\n The world also is stablished that it cannot be moved.\n\n=30.= _The world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved_] In\nPsalms xcvi. 10 this clause is preceded by the words, _Say among the\nnations, The LORD reigneth_, and is followed by the words, _He shall\njudge the peoples with equity_.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice;\n And let them say among the nations, The LORD reigneth.\n \u00b3\u00b2Let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof;\n Let the field exult, and all that is therein;\n\n=31.= _And let them say_] Psalms xcvi. 10, _Say_ [ye]. The clause is\ndisplaced in Chronicles; compare note on verse 30.\n\n_The LORD reigneth_] i.e. the Lord is claiming His kingdom over the\nearth by coming to judge the earth; compare verse 33. Contrast Habakkuk\ni. 14, where the prophet complains that Jehovah is not asserting\nHimself as the ruler of men.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3Then shall the trees of the wood sing for joy before the LORD,\n For he cometh to judge the earth.\n\n=33.= _to judge the earth_] The joy with which the coming judgement is\ngreeted arises from the fact that the Hebrews regarded a judge as a\nchampion of the oppressed and not as a precise interpreter of statutes.\n\n\n =34\u201236= (= Psalms cvi. 1, 47, 48).\n\n \u00b3\u2074O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good:\n For his mercy _endureth_ for ever.\n\n=34.= _his mercy_ endureth _for ever_] Compare Exodus xx. 6, \u201cshewing\nmercy unto a thousand generations of them that love me\u201d (Revised\nVersion margin).\n\n \u00b3\u2075And say ye, Save us, O God of our salvation,\n And gather us together and deliver us from the nations,\n To give thanks unto thy holy name,\n And to triumph in thy praise.\n\n=35.= _gather us together_] A phrase which shows very clearly that the\nstandpoint of the Psalmist is post-exilic.\n\n \u00b3\u2076Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel,\n From everlasting even to everlasting.\n And all the people said, Amen, and praised the LORD.\n\n=36.= _said, Amen, and praised the LORD_] In the Psalms (cvi. 48) \u201csay,\nAmen! Hallelujah! (i.e. Praise ye the Lord!).\u201d This verse belongs not\nproperly to the Psalm, but is the doxology marking the conclusion of\nthe fourth \u201cbook\u201d of the Psalms. Apparently then the Psalms had already\nbeen arranged in the five collections or \u201cbooks,\u201d into which they were\nfinally divided, by the time of the Chronicler; but the argument is not\nconclusive since (1) the doxology _may_ be really part of the Psalm,\nand (2)\u00a0there is the possibility that verses 7\u201236 are a later insertion\nin Chronicles.\n\n\n =37\u201243.=\n THE SERVICE BEFORE THE ARK AND THE SERVICE AT GIBEON.\n\nThe description of the disposition of the Priests and Levites for the\nworship in Jerusalem and in Gibeon which was begun in verses 4\u20126 is\nhere resumed. verses 37, 38 summarise verses 4\u20126.\n\n \u00b3\u2077So he left there, before the ark of the covenant of the LORD,\n Asaph and his brethren, to minister before the ark continually,\n as every day\u2019s work required: \u00b3\u2078and Obed-edom with their\n brethren, threescore and eight; Obed-edom also the son of\n Jeduthun and Hosah to be doorkeepers:\n\n=38.= _Obed-edom with their brethren_] A name or names seems to be\nmissing after Obed-edom. The LXX. cuts the knot by reading simply \u201cand\n_his_ brethren.\u201d Probably we should insert after Obed-edom the words\n\u201cand Hosah\u201d from the last part of the verse: see the following note.\n\n_Obed-edom also the son of Jeduthun_] If the view of xv. 19\u201221 and\nxvi. 5 taken above be correct, these words also may be deleted as a\nharmonising gloss, added by someone who wished to insist on Obed-edom\nas a _singer_, and hence gave him a place in the line of Jeduthun, one\nof the three great choral guilds.\n\n \u00b3\u2079and Zadok. the priest, and his brethren the priests, before\n the tabernacle of the LORD in the high place that was at Gibeon,\n\n=39.= _Zadok the priest_] As Zadok alone is here mentioned as\n\u201cbefore the tabernacle,\u201d the Chronicler perhaps implies that Abiathar\n(Ahimelech) the other high-priest was in charge of the Ark in Jerusalem.\nOn Zadok and Abiathar, see xv. 11, note.\n\n_the tabernacle of the LORD in the high place that was at Gibeon_] See\nprefatory note to chapter xiii.; and 2 Chronicles i. 3.\n\n \u2074\u2070to offer burnt offerings unto the LORD upon the altar of burnt\n offering continually morning and evening, even according to all\n that is written in the law of the LORD, which he commanded unto\n Israel;\n\n=40.= _the altar of burnt offering_] 2 Chronicles i. 5, 6.\n\n_morning and evening_] Exodus xxix. 38, 39 (= Numbers xxviii. 3, 4).\n\n \u2074\u00b9and with them Heman and Jeduthun, and the rest that were\n chosen, who were expressed by name, to give thanks to the LORD,\n because his mercy _endureth_ for ever;\n\n=41.= _Jeduthun_] Psalms xxxix., lxii., lxxvii. (titles). In vi. 33\u201247,\nxv. 17, 19 the names of the leading singers are given as _Heman_,\n_Asaph_, and _Ethan_. Here and in xxv. 1 ff. however _Jeduthun_ seems\nto take the place of _Ethan_. Probably there was a variation in the\ntradition as to the third name, two families competing each for the\nhonour of its own ancestor.\n\n \u2074\u00b2and with them Heman and Jeduthun _with_ trumpets and cymbals\n for those that should sound aloud, and _with_ instruments for\n the songs of God: and the sons of Jeduthun to be at the gate.\n \u2074\u00b3And all the people departed every man to his house: and David\n returned to bless his house.\n\n=42.= _and with them_, etc.] The words _with them_ are possibly\nrepeated in error from verse 41. Render perhaps, =And Heman and\nJeduthun had trumpets and cymbals=. For _trumpets_ compare xv. 24\n(note).\n\n_sons of Jeduthun_] Perhaps a gloss connected with the statement in\nverse 38, where see note on _Obed-edom also the son of Jeduthun_.\n\n_to be at the gate_] David\u2019s organisation of the doorkeepers is given\nin xxvi. 1\u201219.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVII.\n\n\n =1\u201227= (= 2 Samuel vii. 1\u201229).\n GOD\u2019S ANSWER TO DAVID\u2019S EXPRESSED DESIRE TO BUILD A TEMPLE.\n DAVID\u2019S THANKSGIVING.\n\nThis passage is a reproduction with some omissions and variations of\n2 Samuel vii. The text is generally smoother in Chronicles, and in\nsome cases (e.g. in verse 6) we cannot doubt that the Chronicler has\npreserved an older and better reading than the present text of Samuel,\nwhilst in other instances the Chronicler has consciously emended his\ntext of Samuel.\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass, when David dwelt in his house, that\n David said to Nathan the prophet, Lo, I dwell in an house of\n cedar, but the ark of the covenant of the LORD _dwelleth_ under\n curtains.\n\n=1.= _in his house_] Samuel adds, _and the LORD had given him rest from\nall his enemies round about_. The Chronicler omits these words probably\nbecause his next three chapters (xviii.\u2012xx.) are devoted to wars\n(compare 2 Samuel viii. and x.).\n\n_Nathan_] The prophet of the court in the reign of David: see e.g.\n2 Samuel xii.; 1 Kings i.\n\n_the ark of the covenant_] So called because it contained the two\ntables of the covenant, 1 Kings viii. 9.\n\n \u00b2And Nathan said unto David, Do all that is in thine heart; for\n God is with thee.\n\n=2.= _in thine heart_] The heart according to Hebrew thought is the\nseat of intention and purpose.\n\n \u00b3And it came to pass the same night, that the word of God came\n to Nathan, saying, \u2074Go and tell David my servant, Thus saith the\n LORD, Thou shalt not build me an house to dwell in:\n\n=3.= _the same night_] Genesis xx. 3; 1 Samuel iii. 2, 3; 1 Kings\niii. 5; Job iv. 12, 13.\n\n \u2075for I have not dwelt in an house since the day that I brought\n up Israel, unto this day; but have gone\u00b9 from tent to tent, and\n from _one_ tabernacle _to another_.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _have been_.\n\n=5.= _I brought up Israel_] i.e. _out of Egypt_ (so Samuel).\n\n_but have gone from tent to tent, and from_ one _tabernacle_ to\nanother] Samuel _but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle_. The\nHebrew text of Chronicles defies translation; that of Samuel is better.\n\n \u2076In all places wherein I have walked with all Israel, spake I a\n word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to feed\n my people, saying, Why have ye not built me an house of cedar?\n\n=6.= _the judges_] A better reading than _the tribes_ (Samuel).\n\n \u2077Now therefore thus shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus\n saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote\u00b9, from\n following the sheep, that thou shouldest be prince\u00b2 over my\n people Israel: \u2078and I have been with thee whithersoever thou\n wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies from before thee;\n and I will make thee a name, like unto the name of the great\n ones that are in the earth.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _pasture_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _leader_.\n\n =7.= _sheepcote_] Better as margin =pasture=.\n\n \u2079And I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant\n them, that they may dwell in their own place, and be moved no\n more; neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any\n more, as at the first,\n\n=9.= _I will appoint_, etc.] i.e. will establish them in Canaan with\ncomplete ascendancy over their enemies.\n\n_waste them_] Samuel _afflict them_.\n\n \u00b9\u2070and _as_ from the day that I commanded judges to be over my\n people Israel; and I will\u00b9 subdue all thine enemies. Moreover I\n tell thee that the LORD will build thee an house.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _have subdued_.\n\n=10.= _build thee an house_] Samuel _make thee an house_, the house\nmeant being a dynasty, and not a building.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And it shall come to pass, when thy days be fulfilled that\n thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will set up thy seed\n after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his\n kingdom.\n\n=11.= _that thou must go to be with_] Samuel _and thou shalt sleep\nwith_, the usual euphemism for \u201cto die.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u00b2He shall build me an house, and I will establish his throne\n for ever.\n\n=12.= _me an house_] Samuel _an house for my name_.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not\n take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was\n before thee:\n\n=13.= _my son_] Here Samuel adds, _If he commit iniquity, I will\nchasten him with the rod of men and with the stripes of the children of\nmen_: this the Chronicler omits in order that not even a suggestion of\nthe coming evil days might at this stage rest on David and his line.\n\n_from him that was before thee_] Samuel _from Saul whom I put away\nbefore thee_. The reading in Chronicles is to be preferred.\n\n \u00b9\u2074but I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever:\n and his throne shall be established for ever. \u00b9\u2075According to all\n these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan\n speak unto David.\n\n=14.= _I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever_]\nSamuel _And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for\never before thee_ (but read _before me_). The reading in Samuel is no\ndoubt the original. The change made in Chronicles neatly expresses the\nChronicler\u2019s conviction that the kingdom of Israel was not a human but\na Divine institution, its true ruler being God Himself.\n\n_in mine house_] Numbers xii. 7; compare 1 Timothy iii. 15.\n\n \u00b9\u2076Then David the king went in, and sat before the LORD; and he\n said, Who am I, O LORD God, and what is my house, that thou hast\n brought me thus far?\n\n=16.= _went in_] i.e. into the tent which he had pitched for the Ark;\nxvi. 1.\n\n_sat before the LORD_] So LXX. and 2 Samuel vii. 18. The Targum rightly\nparaphrases, \u201cand tarried in prayer before Jehovah.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2077And this was a small thing in thine eyes, O God; but thou hast\n spoken of thy servant\u2019s house for a great while to come, and\n hast regarded me according to the estate of a man of high degree,\n O LORD God.\n\n=17.= _and hast regarded me according to the estate of a man of high\ndegree_] In 2 Samuel vii. 19, _and this_ too _after the manner of men_,\nor rather _and this is the law for men_ (an exclamation), but the text\nboth in Samuel and Chronicles is certainly corrupt. The Hebrew phrase\nis not quite the same in the two passages, and there is nothing in\nSamuel corresponding with the words _of high degree_, but the text of\nChronicles seems to be derived from that of Samuel An emendation \u201cand\nhast let me see the generations of men for ever,\u201d i.e. the fortunes\nof my distant descendants, has met with some approval, but no really\nsatisfactory translation or explanation has yet been given of the\nHebrew.\n\n \u00b9\u2078What can David _say_ yet more unto thee concerning the honour\n which is done to thy servant? for thou knowest thy servant.\n\n=18.= _concerning the honour which is done to thy servant_] Again an\nobscure text. Following Samuel we should probably omit these words.\n\n_thou knowest_] Approvest, acceptest; compare Psalms i. 6, Psalms ci. 4;\nJeremiah i. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u2079O LORD, for thy servant\u2019s sake, and according to thine own\n heart, hast thou wrought all this greatness, to make known all\n _these_ great things. \u00b2\u2070O LORD, there is none like thee, neither\n is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have\n heard with our ears.\n\n=19.= _for thy servant\u2019s sake_] 2 Samuel vii. 21, _for thy word\u2019s sake_,\nbut the LXX. of 2 Samuel agrees with the text of Chronicles.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And\u00b9 what one nation in the earth is like thy people Israel,\n whom God went to redeem unto himself for a people, to make thee\n a name by great and terrible things, in driving out nations from\n before thy people, which thou redeemedst out of Egypt? \u00b2\u00b2For\n thy people Israel didst thou make thine own people for ever; and\n thou, LORD, becamest their God.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _And who is like thy people Israel, a nation that is\n alone in the earth &c._\n\n=21.= _what one nation in the earth is like thy people Israel_] Better\nas margin, =who is like thy people Israel, a nation that is alone in\nthe earth=. Compare Targum _a people unique and chosen in the earth_.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And now, O LORD, let the word that thou hast spoken concerning\n thy servant, and concerning his house, be established for ever,\n and do as thou hast spoken.\n\n=23.= _be established_] Literally be made _Amen_ (i.e. \u201csure\u201d).\n\n \u00b2\u2074And\u00b9 let thy name be established and magnified for ever,\n saying, The LORD of hosts is the God of Israel, even a God to\n Israel: and the house of David thy servant is established before\n thee.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Yea, let it be established, and let thy name be\n magnified &c._\n\n=24.= _And let thy name ... magnified_] Better, as margin, =Yea, let it\nbe established, and let thy name be magnified=.\n\n_even a God to Israel_] delete as a dittography.\n\n \u00b2\u2075For thou, O my God, hast revealed to thy servant that thou\n wilt build him an house: therefore hath thy servant found _in\n his heart_ to pray before thee. \u00b2\u2076And now, O LORD, thou art God,\n and hast promised this good thing unto thy servant:\n\n=25.= _hath ... found ... to pray_] i.e. hath found words and courage\nto pray.\n\n \u00b2\u2077and now it hath pleased thee to bless the house of thy servant,\n that it may continue for ever before thee: for thou, O LORD,\n hast blessed, and it is blessed for ever.\n\n=27.= _hast blessed, and it is blessed for ever_] 2 Samuel vii. 29,\n_thou, O Lord GOD, hast spoken it; and with thy blessing let the house\nof thy servant be blessed for ever_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n\n =1\u201217= (= 2 Samuel viii. 1\u201218).\n A SUMMARY OF DAVID\u2019S FOREIGN WARS. DAVID\u2019S OFFICIALS.\n\nThis chapter like the last is taken from 2 Samuel with a few omissions\nand variations. The Chronicler paraphrases (verses 1, 17), omits (verse\n2), has a different reading (verses 4, 8, 10, 12). In some cases the\nbetter reading is in Chronicles.\n\nThe campaigns (except perhaps that against Moab) seem to be narrated in\nchronological order. David first makes sure of his most pressing enemy\nthe Philistines (verse 1); then feeling safe towards the south-west\nhe turns towards the north-east secure on the Euphrates (but see note\nverse 3) a station (valuable for trade) held by the Syrians of Zobah\n(verse 3); the Syrians of Damascus fearing to be excluded from the\nRiver by David\u2019s success come to the help of their kinsmen (verse 5);\nlastly the Edomites, urged perhaps by the Syrians to make a diversion\nin their favour and thinking it safe to attack Judah during the absence\nof David, join in the war, but are signally defeated by a detachment\nunder Joab and Abishai (verse 12).\n\nThe war with Moab (verse 2) is surprising, if it took place at an early\ndate in David\u2019s reign, for he seems to have been on specially friendly\nterms with the king of Moab during his exile; compare 1 Samuel xxii. 3,\n4 and Kirkpatrick on 2 Samuel viii. 2.\n\n\n =1\u201213= (= 2 Samuel viii. 1\u201214).\n A SUMMARY OF DAVID\u2019S FOREIGN WARS.\n\n \u00b9And after this it came to pass, that David smote the\n Philistines, and subdued them, and took Gath and her towns out\n of the hand of the Philistines.\n\n=1.= _after this_] The phrase is adopted from 2 Samuel viii. 1 and\nprobably came originally from a still earlier book of annals, in which\nthe context may have been different. We cannot therefore say at what\nperiod of David\u2019s reign the conquest of Gath took place.\n\n_took Gath and her towns_] It is impossible to say for certain whether\nthis is the original text or only an interpretation of the obscure\nreading in 2 Samuel viii. 1, _took the bridle of the mother city_\n(Revised Version).\n\n \u00b2And he smote Moab; and the Moabites became servants to David,\n and brought presents.\n\n=2.= _smote Moab_] The Chronicler at this point omits, as he often\nomits, some difficult words of Samuel. 2 Samuel viii. 2 seems to say\nthat David put two-thirds of the Moabites (presumably the warriors) to\ndeath, but the meaning of the verse is uncertain.\n\n_brought presents_] i.e. tribute, in acknowledgment of David\u2019s\nsuperiority. The same Hebrew phrase (translated \u201cbring an offering\u201d)\nis used Psalms xcvi. 8 of sacrificing to Jehovah.\n\n \u00b3And David smote Hadarezer king of Zobah unto\u00b9 Hamath, as he\n went to stablish his dominion by the river Euphrates.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _by_.\n\n=3.= _Hadarezer_] So spelt in 2 Samuel x. 16\u201219, but in 2 Samuel viii.\n3\u201212, _Hadadezer_, the right form (as inscriptions show).\n\n_Zobah unto Hamath_] Render as margin =Zobah by Hamath=, the position\nof Zobah being fixed by the note that it was near Hamath.\n\n_Hamath_] The modern _Hama_ on the Orontes, midway between Antioch and\nDamascus, but somewhat further to the east than either. See below verse\n9; also xiii. 5 and 2 Chronicles viii. 3.\n\n_as he went to stablish his dominion_] _He_ may refer to Hadarezer or\nto David; the latter, probably, is the Chronicler\u2019s intention. The\nreading in 2 Samuel viii. 3 (\u201cto _recover_ his dominion\u201d\u2015\u2015Revised\nVersion) should be emended to the text in Chronicles.\n\n_by the river Euphrates_] The utter improbability that David exercised\nany authority in regions so far north throws no doubt upon the reading,\nfor the Chronicler and the author of Samuel may easily have believed\nthat he did so.\n\n \u2074And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand\n horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the\n chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots.\n\n=4.= _a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen_] Samuel _a\nthousand and seven hundred horsemen_ (so Hebrew but LXX. of Samuel\nagrees with Chronicles). _Houghed_ = \u201chamstrung.\u201d\n\n \u2075And when the Syrians\u00b9 of Damascus\u00b2 came to succour Hadarezer\n king of Zobah, David smote of the Syrians\u00b9 two and twenty\n thousand men.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Aram_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Darmesek_.\n\n=5.= _Damascus_] The name is variously written in Hebrew, _Darmesek_\n(Chronicles), _Dammesek_ (Genesis, 1 Kings), _Dummesek_ (2 Kings xvi.\n10). See G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Damascus_ in _Encyclopedia Biblia_.\n\n_came to succour_] By interposing between David and his own land and so\nthreatening his rear.\n\n \u2076Then David put _garrisons_ in Syria\u00b9 of Damascus\u00b2; and the\n Syrians\u00b9 became servants to David, and brought presents. And the\n LORD gave victory\u00b3 to David whithersoever he went.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Aram_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Darmesek_.\n\n \u00b3 Or, _saved David_.\n\n=6.= _put_ garrisons _in Syria of Damascus_] margin in _Aram of\nDarmesek_, i.e. in the Aramean kingdom of which Damascus was the\ncapital. David\u2019s purpose of course was to secure his rear in any future\noperations towards Hamath or towards the Euphrates.\n\n \u2077And David took the shields of gold that were on the servants of\n Hadarezer, and brought them to Jerusalem.\n\n=7.= _shields of gold_] \u201cshields\u201d = Hebrew _sh\u0115l\u0101tim_. The meaning of\nthe Hebrew word is doubtful; most probably it does _not_ mean \u201cshield,\u201d\nfor (1)\u00a0a shield would not be described as \u201cupon\u201d the person to whom\nit belonged, (2)\u00a0the early authorities, i.e. the LXX. translators, the\nTargum, and the Peshit\u1e6da (on 2 Samuel viii. 7; 2 Kings xi. 10; Jeremiah\nli. 11; Ezekiel xxvii. 11) never give \u201cshield,\u201d but either leave the\nword untranslated or give various conjectural renderings. A later\nauthority (Targum on 1 Chronicles xviii. 7; 2 Chronicles xxiii. 9)\ngives \u201cshield,\u201d while LXX. gives \u201ccollars\u201d (\u03ba\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2) here, and \u201carms\u201d\nor \u201cshields\u201d (\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1) in 2 Chronicles.\n\nThe most probable rendering of the word is \u201csuits of armour\u201d (see\nBarnes, _Expository Times_, x. 43 ff.).\n\n_and brought them to Jerusalem_] So Hebrew LXX. Targum, but the\nPeshit\u1e6da (all important MSS.) omits the words, and they may be a gloss\nintroduced from 2 Samuel viii. 7.\n\n \u2078And from Tibhath and from Cun, cities of Hadarezer, David took\n very much brass, wherewith Solomon made the brasen sea, and the\n pillars, and the vessels of brass.\n\n=8.= _Tibhath_] compare _Tebah_, the name of an Aramean family, Genesis\nxxii. 24. Nothing is known certainly of the position of the city. In\n2 Samuel viii. 8 _Betah_ (= _Tebah_).\n\n_Cun_] 2 Samuel viii. 8, \u201cBerothai.\u201d Nothing is certainly known of\na city of either name; but \u201cBerothai\u201d may be the same as \u201cBerothah\u201d\n(Ezekiel xlvii. 16).\n\n_very much brass_] Compare xxi. 14, xxix. 2.\n\n_brass_] Not the metal generally so called. Revised Version (margin\nnote to Genesis iv. 22) gives _copper_ as an alternative rendering. The\n\u201cbrass\u201d of the ancients (\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, LXX.) corresponds rather to _bronze_.\n\n_the brasen sea_, etc.] Compare 2 Chronicles iv. 11\u201218.\n\n \u2079And when Tou king of Hamath heard that David had smitten all\n the host of Hadarezer king of Zobah,\n\n=9.= _Tou_] In 2 Samuel viii. 9 \u201cToi\u201d (so Hebrew, but LXX. \u201cTou\u201d).\n\n_Hamath_] see above verse 3. Hamath is sometimes referred to as the\nnorthern boundary of Israel, compare 1 Kings viii. 65; 2 Kings xiv.\n25, 28.\n\n \u00b9\u2070he sent Hadoram his son to king David, to salute him, and to\n bless him, because he had fought against Hadarezer and smitten\n him; for Hadarezer had wars with Tou; and _he had with him_ all\n manner of vessels of gold and silver and brass.\n\n=10.= _Hadoram_] In 2 Samuel viii. 10, \u201cJoram.\u201d Both these forms are\nprobably Hebrew adaptations of the real name.\n\nhe had with him _all manner of vessels_] Such informal tribute was an\nacknowledgment of David\u2019s suzerainty made in order to claim David\u2019s\nprotection in war. Compare the action of Asa (1 Kings xv. 18, 19) and\nof Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 7, 8). In all three cases the policy was the same,\ni.e. to acknowledge a distant suzerain and so gain the benefit of a\nvaluable alliance while losing the minimum of independence.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9These also did king David dedicate unto the LORD, with the\n silver and the gold that he carried away from all the nations;\n from Edom, and from Moab, and from the children of Ammon, and\n from the Philistines, and from Amalek.\n\n=11.= _from Amalek_] So 2 Samuel viii. 12, but we have no record of any\nwar of David with Amalek except the account in 1 Samuel xxx.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Moreover Abishai\u00b9 the son of Zeruiah smote of the Edomites\n in the Valley of Salt eighteen thousand. \u00b9\u00b3And he put garrisons\n in Edom; and all the Edomites became servants to David. And the\n LORD gave victory\u00b2 to David whithersoever he went.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Abshai_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _saved David_.\n\n=12.= _Abishai the son of Zeruiah_] In 2 Samuel viii. 13 David, and in\nPsalms lx. (title) Joab, receives the credit of this victory. Abishai\nmight have commanded in the battle, while Joab (compare 1 Kings xi. 16)\ncompleted the conquest of the country; but it is highly probable that\nthe reading _Abishai the son of Zeruiah_ has arisen here through a\ncopyist\u2019s mistake and that the true reading is =And when he= (David)\n=returned he smote Edom=, etc.\n\n_of the Edomites_] Literally \u201cof Edom,\u201d so Psalms lx. (title), but\nin 2 Samuel \u201cof the Syrians,\u201d literally \u201cAram.\u201d The two words \u201cEdom\u201d\nand \u201cAram\u201d when written in Hebrew are very much alike and are easily\nconfused. The reading \u201cEdom\u201d is right here.\n\n_the Valley of Salt_] Probably the marshy flat (B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075,\np. 174) at the south end of the Dead Sea. This valley is dominated by\nthe Jebel Usdum, a hill consisting \u201calmost entirely of pure\ncrystallised salt\u201d (B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 174).\n\n_eighteen thousand_] Psalms lx. (title), \u201ctwelve thousand,\u201d not an\nimportant variation.\n\n\n =14\u201217= (= 2 Samuel viii. 15\u201218; compare 2 Samuel xx. 23\u201226).\n DAVID\u2019S OFFICIALS.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And David reigned over all Israel; and he executed judgement\n and justice unto all his people.\n\n=14.= _unto all his people_] David was his own chief justice, but\nprobably the work was too much for one man; compare 2 Samuel xv. 2\u20124.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And Joab the son of Zeruiah was over the host; and Jehoshaphat\n the son of Ahilud was recorder\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _chronicler_.\n\n=15.= _recorder_] margin, =chronicler=; LXX., \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2. His\nbusiness was probably to remind the king of his various duties of state.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Abimelech the son of Abiathar,\n were priests; and Shavsha was scribe\u00b9;\n\n \u00b9 Or, _secretary_.\n\n=16.= _Abimelech the son of Abiathar_] In 2 Samuel viii. 17, _Ahimelech\nthe son of Abiathar_, but read =Abiathar son of Ahimelech= in both\npassages. Compare xv. 11, xxiv. 3, notes; and Kirkpatrick on 2 Samuel\nviii. 17.\n\n_Shavsha_] 2 Samuel viii. 17, _Seraiah_; 2 Samuel xx. 25, _Sheva_;\nand 1 Kings iv. 3 (perhaps), _Shisha_. _Shisha_ and _Shavsha_ probably\nrepresent two different attempts to pronounce a foreign name, perhaps\nShamsha; _Seraiah_ and _Sheva_ are mere errors of transcription.\nForeigners were admitted to posts of authority in the empire of David\nand Solomon; Ittai the Gittite and Uriah the Hittite are instances.\n\n_scribe_] margin, =secretary=. See 2 Kings xii. 10, xviii. 18, xxii. 3;\ncompare 2 Kings xxv. 19, a passage which suggests that there was a\nsecond scribe with military duties. The first, the king\u2019s scribe, would\nformulate the king\u2019s orders and conduct his correspondence with foreign\npowers. Shavsha\u2019s sons held the office in the reign of Solomon, 1 Kings\niv. 3.\n\n \u00b9\u2077and Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites and\n the Pelethites; and the sons of David were chief about the king.\n\n=17.= _Benaiah_] Compare xi. 22\u201225.\n\n_the Cherethites and the Pelethites_] David\u2019s bodyguard. The\nCherethites were almost certainly Philistines (1 Samuel xxx. 14;\nEzekiel xxv. 16; Zephaniah ii. 5), the Pelethites were probably also\nPhilistines (2 Samuel xv. 18). Foreign bodyguards are well-known in\nhistory.\n\n_chief about the king_] Literally, _the chief at the kings hand_, i.e.\nformed the executive to carry out his commands; compare Nehemiah xi. 24.\nIn 2 Samuel viii. 18 (Revised Version) David\u2019s sons are described as\n_priests_, a statement which is in all probability correct, but which\nthe Chronicler, following the later theory of the priesthood, could not\naccept (see Introduction, pp. xli. f.).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIX.\n\n\n =1\u201219= (= 2 Samuel x. 1\u201219).\n WAR WITH THE AMMONITES AND THEIR ARAMEAN ALLIES.\n\nChronicles here omits the story of David\u2019s kindness in seeking out and\nbefriending Mephibosheth (Merib-baal) the son of Jonathan (2 Samuel\nix.), because he has ignored the story of David\u2019s relations with Saul.\nFurther the Court History of David which occupies an important place\nin 2 Samuel is passed over altogether in Chronicles Consequently the\nshameful episode of Bath-sheba, and the rebellion of Absalom vanish\nfrom the account of David. It is obvious how greatly the presentation\nof David\u2019s life and character is affected by these omissions. Yet from\nhis point of view the Chronicler is right in passing these matters\nby in silence. He was concerned to present David essentially as the\nfounder of the religious life of Israel as a kingdom and of the Temple\nas an institution of religion.\n\nThere are several variations in text between 2 Samuel x. and\n1 Chronicles xix., e.g. verses 6, 7 (addition in Chronicles), 16\n(omission from Chronicles), 18 (variation in reckoning).\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass after this, that Nahash the king of the\n children of Ammon died, and his son reigned in his stead.\n\n=1.= _after this_] The war with Ammon has already been referred to by\nanticipation in xviii. 11.\n\n_Nahash_] Probably the Nahash mentioned in 1 Samuel xi. 1.\n\n_Ammon_] The Ammonites were a kindred race to the Hebrews, being\ndescended according to tradition from Lot, the nephew of Abraham;\ncompare Deuteronomy ii. 19. The two Ammonite names here given are pure\nHebrew, _Nahash_ (= \u201cSerpent\u201d) and _Hanun_ (= \u201cFavoured, _Fortunatus_\u201d);\nthe Ammonite language, like the Moabite, was doubtless very similar to\nHebrew.\n\n \u00b2And David said, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of\n Nahash, because his father shewed kindness to me. So David sent\n messengers to comfort him concerning his father. And David\u2019s\n servants came into the land of the children of Ammon to Hanun,\n to comfort him.\n\n=2.= _sent messengers to comfort him_] A customary act of international\ncourtesy; compare 2 Kings xx. 12. Its breach was resented. Thus in the\nTell el-Amarna letters (x. 16) the king of Kardunias writes, \u201cShould\nnot my brother (i.e. the king of Egypt) have heard that I am sick? Why\nhas he not comforted me? Why has he not sent his messenger, not looked\ninto it?\u201d (editor H. Winckler, p. 23).\n\n \u00b3But the princes of the children of Ammon said to Hanun,\n Thinkest thou that David doth honour thy father, that he hath\n sent comforters unto thee? are not his servants come unto thee\n for to search, and to overthrow, and to spy out the land?\n\n=3.= _the land_] 2 Samuel x. 3, _the city_, i.e. Rabbah (see xx. 1).\n\n \u2074So Hanun took David\u2019s servants, and shaved them, and cut off\n their garments in the middle, even to their buttocks, and sent\n them away.\n\n=4.= _shaved them_] 2 Samuel x. 4, _shaved off the one half of their\nbeards_. Of course a great insult; compare Isaiah l. 6.\n\n_cut off their garments_] Jewish ambassadors are represented on the\nBlack Obelisk (a monument of Shalmaneser II, king of Assyria, now\npreserved in the British Museum) as wearing robes reaching to the feet;\nHanun reduced ambassadors to the level of captives; compare Isaiah\nxx. 4.\n\n \u2075Then there went certain, and told David how the men were served.\n And he sent to meet them; for the men were greatly ashamed. And\n the king said, Tarry at Jericho until your beards be grown, and\n then return.\n\n=5.= _Tarry at Jericho_] Thus (1)\u00a0the feelings of the ambassadors would\nbe spared, (2)\u00a0the insult would be less widely known until it had been\navenged.\n\n \u2076And when the children of Ammon saw that they had made\n themselves odious to David, Hanun and the children of Ammon sent\n a thousand talents of silver to hire them chariots and horsemen\n out of Mesopotamia, and out of Aram-maacah, and out of Zobah.\n\n=6.= _a thousand talents of silver_] A very large sum; for a hundred\ntalents Amaziah hired a hundred thousand men (2 Chronicles xxv. 6).\n\n_chariots and horsemen_] The Israelite armies on the contrary consisted\nchiefly of infantry, the country being for the most part unsuitable for\nhorses.\n\n_Mesopotamia_] Hebrew \u201cAram (Syria) of the two rivers\u201d (compare Genesis\nxxiv. 10, Revised Version margin), i.e. probably the land between the\nEuphrates and the Chaboras. The Greeks used the term _Mesopotamia_\nof a wider district, i.e. of the country between the Euphrates and\nthe Tigris. This mention of Mesopotamia is probably premature, for\nin verse 16 the summons of Syrians from beyond the Euphrates is spoken\nof as a new thing. The corresponding expression in 2 Samuel x. 6 is\n_Beth-rehob_, a district which has not yet been identified.\n\n_Aram-maacah_] compare vii. 15, note; Deuteronomy iii. 14; Joshua xii.\n5, xiii. 11.\n\n_Zobah_]. compare xviii. 3, note.\n\n \u2077So they hired them thirty and two thousand chariots, and the\n king of Maacah and his people; who came and pitched before\n Medeba. And the children of Ammon gathered themselves together\n from their cities, and came to battle.\n\n=7.= _thirty and two thousand chariots_] Compare 2 Samuel x. 6, which\nreckons the army (including Maacah) at 33,000, of whom 20,000 are\nexpressly described as footmen. The word \u201cchariots\u201d may have slipped\nin from verse 6 instead of \u201cmen\u201d or may be an intentional alteration,\nmagnifying the war.\n\n_Medeba_] In the territory of Reuben; Joshua xiii. 26. The country\nround is a table-land suited for the man\u0153uvres of chariots. The place\nof the rendezvous of the allies is not mentioned in 2 Samuel x., some\nwords having probably fallen out of the text.\n\n \u2078And when David heard of it, he sent Joab, and all the host of\n the mighty men. \u2079And the children of Ammon came out, and put the\n battle in array at the gate of the city: and the kings that were\n come were by themselves in the field.\n\n=8.= _David ... sent Joab_] Why in such a crisis did he not go himself?\nPerhaps because he could watch the gathering of the more serious storm\ndescribed in verses 16\u201219 better from Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Now when Joab saw that the battle\u00b9 was set against him before\n and behind, he chose of all the choice men of Israel, and put\n \u00b9\u00b9them in array against the Syrians. And the rest of the people\n he committed into the hand of Abishai\u00b2 his brother, and they put\n themselves in array against the children of Ammon. \u00b9\u00b2And he said,\n If the Syrians be too strong for me, then thou shalt help me:\n but if the children of Ammon be too strong for thee, then I will\n help thee.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _the face of the battle was against_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Abshai_.\n\n=10.= _he chose of all the choice men_] The Syrians were the more\nformidable because of the chariots they had; Joab therefore opposed to\nthem the flower of his army.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3Be of good courage, and let us play the men for our people,\n and for the cities of our God: and the LORD do that which\n seemeth him good.\n\n=13.= _the cities of our God_] The cities which our God has given us\nand in which He is worshipped. If these were captured by the enemy,\nfalse gods would be worshipped in them. Religious feeling often\nsupplies the place of patriotism in the East.\n\n \u00b9\u2074So Joab and the people that were with him drew nigh before the\n Syrians unto the battle; and they fled before him.\n\n=14.= _drew nigh before the Syrians_] Without fear for their own rear\nadvanced against the Syrian front.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And when the children of Ammon saw that the Syrians were fled,\n they likewise fled before Abishai his brother, and entered into\n the city. Then Joab came to Jerusalem.\n\n=15.= _Joab came to Jerusalem_] Probably because he was wanted for the\nnew danger gathering in the North.\n\n\n =16\u201219.=\n THE END OF THE ARAMEAN WAR.\n\nThree stages are apparent in the war with Zobah _as related in\nChronicles_, (a)\u00a0that in which David secured a position on the\nEuphrates, xviii. 3\u20128, (b)\u00a0the stage during which troops from Zobah\nacted as auxiliaries to the Ammonites, xix. 6\u201215, (c)\u00a0the final stage\nwhich ended in the conclusion of a formal peace, xix. 16\u201219. The actual\nfacts of David\u2019s activities against the Arameans are by no means easy\nto ascertain, as may be seen in the commentaries on the more complex\naccount which is given in Samuel.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And when the Syrians saw that they were put to the worse\n before Israel, they sent messengers, and drew forth the Syrians\n that were beyond the River, with Shophach the captain of the\n host of Hadarezer at their head.\n\n=16.= _the Syrians that were beyond the River_] i.e. the Syrians of\n\u201cMesopotamia\u201d; compare verse 6, note. 2 Samuel x. 16 adds, _and they\ncame to Helam_; the position of Helam however is unknown.\n\n_Shophach_] In 2 Samuel x. 16 called \u201cShobach.\u201d The whole allied army\nwas united under one general.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And it was told David; and he gathered all Israel together,\n and passed over Jordan, and came upon them, and set the battle\n in array against them. So when David had put the battle in array\n against the Syrians, they fought with him.\n\n=17.= _came upon them_] or possibly read, as 2 Samuel x. 17, =came to\nHelam=. According to 2 Samuel x. the Syrian army assembled at Helam,\nand was there attacked by David.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And the Syrians fled before Israel; and David slew of the\n Syrians _the men of_ seven thousand chariots, and forty thousand\n footmen, and killed Shophach the captain of the host.\n\n=18.= _seven thousand_] 2 Samuel x. 18, _seven hundred_: an intentional\nchange made by the Chronicler to enhance the achievement of David.\n\n_forty thousand footmen_] 2 Samuel x. 18, _forty thousand horsemen_.\nSwarms of horsemen have usually formed the strength of armies raised on\nthe eastern bank of the Euphrates; but the reading in Chronicles may\nwell be correct.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And when the servants of Hadarezer saw that they were put to\n the worse before Israel, they made peace with David, and served\n him: neither would the Syrians help the children of Ammon any\n more.\n\n=19.= _the servants_] i.e. his vassals and tributaries; in 2 Samuel\n\u201call the kings that were servants to Hadarezer.\u201d We are not told what\ncourse Hadarezer himself took; possibly, being deserted by his allies,\nhe ceased from hostilities without making any treaty with David.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XX.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (= 2 Samuel xi. 1, xii. 26\u201231).\n THE SUBJUGATION OF AMMON.\n\nThe account of the siege of Rabbah is given more shortly in Chronicles\nthan in 2 Samuel From the latter we learn that the Ark was in the\nbesiegers\u2019 camp (xi. 11), that the city was defended with spirit\n(xi. 17), and finally taken piecemeal (xii. 26\u201229).\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass, at the time of the return of the year,\n at the time when kings go out _to battle_, that Joab led forth\n the power of the army, and wasted the country of the children\n of Ammon, and came and besieged Rabbah. But David tarried at\n Jerusalem. And Joab smote Rabbah, and overthrew it.\n\n=1.= _at the time of the return of the year_] i.e. in the spring,\n2 Samuel xi. 1; 1 Kings xx. 22.\n\n_the power of the army_] The Hebrew phrase is quite general in meaning:\n_the host of war, the military forces_.\n\n_Rabbah_] the capital of the Ammonites; Jeremiah xlix. 2; Ezekiel\nxxi. 20 (25, Hebrew). Its site, now called _\u2018Amm\u0101n_, is covered with\nimportant ruins of the Roman and Byzantine periods. The town lies in a\nfertile basin, its citadel on a hill on the north side.\n\n _David tarried at Jerusalem_] In 2 Samuel these words introduce the\nstory of David\u2019s adultery with Bath-sheba, which is omitted from\nChronicles.\n\n_Joab smote Rabbah_] In 2 Samuel xii. 27 Joab reports to David the\ncapture of _the city of waters_ (i.e. the lower city), and invites him\nto come and complete the conquest (presumably by capturing the citadel)\nin person. Probably the citadel was dependent for water on the river\nwhich flows through the town.\n\n \u00b2And David took the crown of their king\u00b9 from off his head, and\n found it to weigh a talent of gold, and there were precious\n stones in it; and it was set upon David\u2019s head: and he brought\n forth the spoil of the city, exceeding much.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Malcam_ See Zephaniah i. 5.\n\n=2.= _of their king_] So also Authorized Version, perhaps rightly, but\nmany scholars prefer to treat the word as a proper name, rendering, as\nmargin, _of Malcam_ (compare Zephaniah i. 5), i.e. Milcom, the national\ngod of the Ammonites (1 Kings xi. 5). LXX. has a double translation of\nthe one Hebrew word: _Molchol_ (_Molchom_) _their king_. The name of\nthe god, whether the right form be _Molech_ (1 Kings xi. 7) or more\nprobably _Milcom_ or _Malcam_, means either \u201cking\u201d or, less probably,\n\u201ccounsellor.\u201d In the former case his image would in all probability\nwear a crown.\n\n_it was set upon David\u2019s head_] A symbolic action implying that David\ncompletely annexed the Ammonite territory; other conquered nations\nretained a partial independence on condition of the payment of tribute.\n\n_he brought forth the spoil of the city, exceeding much_] doubtless a\ntriumphal procession of captives and spoil, such as an Assyrian relief\nin the British Museum represents passing before Sennacherib at the\ncapture of Lachish.\n\n \u00b3And he brought forth the people that were therein, and cut\n _them_ with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes. And\n thus did David unto all the cities of the children of Ammon. And\n David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.\n\n=3.= _and cut_ them _with saws_] Read probably (compare 2 Samuel xii.\n31, Revised Version margin) =and put them with saws=, i.e. put them to\nwork with saws, etc. Compare 2 Chronicles ii. 17, 18; Joshua ix. 21\u201223.\nThe implements mentioned here and in the parallel passage of 2 Samuel\nsuggest task-work, not massacre. The Ammonites were reduced to bondage\nlike that of Israel in Egypt. The exceptionally harsh treatment of the\nAmmonites was doubtless due to the exceptional insults which David\u2019s\nambassadors had received from them. A very different spirit towards\nAmmon is shown in Deuteronomy ii. 19.\n\n\n =4\u20128= (= 2 Samuel xxi. 18\u201222).\n PHILISTINE CHAMPIONS SLAIN.\n\nThis section is the last in which the Chronicler notices David\u2019s wars.\nIt is taken from 2 Samuel xxi., where, however, it is preceded by an\naccount (verses 15\u201217) of David\u2019s narrow escape in an encounter with a\nPhilistine.\n\nBetween the two sections of this chapter the Chronicler omits the\naccount of the rebellions of Absalom and of Sheba, and the story of the\nGibeonite vengeance on the house of Saul (2 Samuel xiii. i\u2012xxi. 14).\n\n \u2074And it came to pass after this, that there arose war at Gezer\u00b9\n with the Philistines: then Sibbecai the Hushathite slew Sippai,\n of the sons of the giant\u00b2: and they were subdued.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxi. 18, _Gob_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Rapha_. According to another reading, _giants_;\n Hebrew _Rephaim_.\n\n=4.= _at Gezer_] See vi. 67, note. In 2 Samuel _at Gob_, but no place\ncalled Gob is known. In 2 Samuel v. 25 it is said that David smote the\nPhilistines \u201cfrom Geba until thou come to Gezer.\u201d\n\n_Sippai_] In 2 Samuel \u201cSaph.\u201d\n\n_giant_] Hebrew \u201cRapha\u201d; the same Hebrew word in the plural \u201cRephaim\u201d\nis translated \u201cgiants\u201d in Deuteronomy ii. 11, Authorized Version These\n\u201cRephaim\u201d dwelt east of Jordan.\n\n \u2075And there was again war with the Philistines; and Elhanan the\n son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the\n staff of whose spear was like a weaver\u2019s beam.\n\n=5.= _Elhanan ... slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath_] In 2 Samuel xxi.\n19, _Elhanan ... the Beth-lehemite slew Goliath_ (Revised Version). The\ndifference between the two sentences in Hebrew is very small, and is\ndue, no doubt, to the Chronicler, or a copyist, who felt that he was\nmaking a certain emendation in substituting the brother of Goliath for\nGoliath himself, since, according to 1 Samuel xvii., Goliath was slain\nby David before he became king.\n\n_slew Lahmi_] read =the Beth-lehemite slew=, etc.\n\n \u2076And there was again war at Gath, where was a man of great\n stature, whose fingers and toes were four and twenty, six _on\n each hand_, and six _on each foot_; and he also was born unto\n the giant\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Rapha_.\n\n=6.= _a man of great stature_] In 2 Samuel xxi. 20 (Hebrew) _a man of\ncontention_, i.e. a challenger or champion.\n\n \u2077And when he defied\u2074 Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea David\u2019s\n brother slew him.\n\n \u2074 Or, _reproached_.\n\n=7.= _Shimea_] See iii. 5, note.\n\n \u2078These were born unto the giant\u00b9 in Gath; and they fell by the\n hand of David, and by the hand of his servants.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Rapha_.\n\n=8.= _These were born unto the giant in Gath_] Again \u201cgiant\u201d is the\nHebrew \u201cRapha\u201d as in verses 4, 6. The meaning is that these belonged to\na branch of the Rephaim which was settled in Gath.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXI.\n\n\n =1\u201227= (= 2 Samuel xxiv. 1\u201225).\n THE NUMBERING AND THE PLAGUE.\n\nComparison of these verses with the account given in Samuel discloses\nnot a few interesting divergences, the more important of which are\npointed out in the notes below (see especially the notes on verses\n1, 6, 25). In general it may be said that the account in Chronicles\ncurtails any features reflecting discredit on David and expands such\nas do him honour. Some scholars consider that the changes are of such\na character that they may all be due directly to the Chronicler, but\nothers see in them motives so various as to suggest the opinion that\nthe Chronicler\u2019s source is not Samuel but an intermediate source. There\nmay be a measure of truth in both contentions. So famous a tale may\nwell have been recounted with modifications in the telling to suit the\nlater idealisation of David. The Chronicler may therefore have been\nworking from the text of Samuel, but some of the changes he introduced\nmay have been generally current, and for these he is in a sense not\n_immediately_ responsible, although of course all were more or less in\naccordance with his taste.\n\nThe subject of the present section (David\u2019s numbering of the people and\nthe plague which followed) is interesting in itself, quite apart from\nthe comparison with Samuel Why was the census considered a sin? Various\nreplies may be made. (1)\u00a0Because the pride of David and the ambitions\nwhich the census might promote revealed a transference of trust from\nGod to self, from spirit to numbers, from justice to power. This view\naccords with our modern moralistic standpoint, but other considerations\ncall for mention. (2)\u00a0Because, unlike the two numberings in the\nwilderness (Numbers i. 1\u201216, iii. 39, xxvi. 1\u201265), it was not made by\nDivine command (compare verse 1, note). This thought may well have been\npresent in the mind of the Chronicler. To it we may add (3)\u00a0the popular\ndread of the census as a sinister and unlucky act. The ground of this\ndread was no doubt mainly practical, being due to the fear that the\nrecords might be used for purposes of fresh taxation or more stringent\nwar-levies, but it may have its roots in an instinct, handed down from\nthe thoughts of primitive ages, when written records were an uncanny\nmystery. Thus S.\u00a0I. Curtiss, _Primitive Semitic Religion To-day_,\np. 69, remarks that the persistence of this fear among modern Semites\nis partially chargeable for the lack of correct statistics as to the\npopulation of Oriental towns. Frazer (in _Anthropological Essays to\nE.\u00a0B. Tylor_, p. 174) refers to the dread of enumeration felt by the\nLapps and by a West African tribe.\n\n \u00b9And Satan\u00b9 stood up against Israel, and moved David to number\n Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _an adversary_.\n\n=1.= _And Satan stood up against Israel_] In 2 Samuel \u201cAnd again (a\nformer occasion being at the time of the famine, 2 Samuel xxi. 1)\nthe anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David\nagainst them.\u201d The change is significant of the late date of Chronicles\nIn an earlier stage of Hebrew thought human sin and folly are at times\nna\u00efvely ascribed to the agency of God, e.g. \u201cHe hardens Pharaoh\u2019s\nheart\u201d (Exodus x. 1, etc.): \u201cquem Deus vult perdere prius dementat.\u201d\nAt a later date the instigation of some subordinate \u201cevil\u201d spirit\nwas adduced, e.g. 1 Kings xxii. 20\u201224; and eventually this spirit\nof temptation was expressly termed \u201cThe Satan\u201d or \u201cSatan,\u201d i.e. \u201cThe\nAdversary.\u201d He was then regarded as a hostile spiritual being, the\nopposite of a _guardian_ angel such as the Michael of Daniel x. 13, 21,\nxii. 1. In the book of Job the Satan is very definitely said to act\nunder the guidance and will of God. Here nothing is said of the Satan\nhaving been directed by Jehovah.\n\n_to number_] Only those of military age (verse 5), over twenty years of\nage (xxvii. 23, 24), were included in the census.\n\n \u00b2And David said to Joab and to the princes of the people, Go,\n number Israel from Beer-sheba even to Dan; and bring me word,\n that I may know the sum of them.\n\n=2.= _to Joab_] The object being to number \u201cthose who drew sword,\u201d the\ncaptain of the host was the most suitable person to entrust with the\nbusiness.\n\n_from Beer-sheba even to Dan_] From the extreme south to the extreme\nnorth of the land.\n\n_Dan_] The modern _Tell el-K\u0101d\u012b_, about forty minutes distance from\nB\u0101ni\u0101s (Paneas), north of Lake Huleh (Waters of Merom). For its\noriginal name _Laish_, see Judges xviii. 28.\n\n_that I may know_] Either with a view to imposing a tax or to\nundertaking some fresh great military expedition.\n\n \u00b3And Joab said, The LORD make his people an hundred times so\n many more as they be: but, my lord the king, are they not all my\n lord\u2019s servants? why doth my lord require this thing? why will\n he be a cause of guilt unto Israel?\n\n=3.= _The LORD make ... are they not all my lord\u2019s servants?_] Counting\nwill not increase their numbers, only Jehovah\u2019s gracious favour can\nsecure that. What more then can David desire than to know, as Joab now\nassures him, that one and all his subjects are loyal?\n\n_why will he be a cause of guilt unto Israel?_] Compare Leviticus iv. 3,\n\u201cif the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people\u201d\n(Revised Version). The community is a unit, and the guilt of one falls\non all.\n\n \u2074Nevertheless the king\u2019s word prevailed against Joab. Wherefore\n Joab departed, and went throughout all Israel, and came to\n Jerusalem.\n\n=4.= _came to Jerusalem_] In 2 Samuel xxiv. 4\u20128 the route is described\nand the time taken in the numbering is stated, _nine months and twenty\ndays_.\n\n \u2075And Joab gave up the sum of the numbering of the people unto\n David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an\n hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred\n threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.\n\n=5.= _they of Israel_] Chronicles gives Israel as 1,100,000 and Judah\nas 470,000; 2 Samuel gives Israel as 800,000 and Judah as 500,000. It\nis difficult to correlate these figures. There are, however, reasons\nfor thinking that the last part of the verse _and Judah was 470,000_,\netc., may be a gloss. If so, then the 200,000 less in Chronicles\n(1,300,000 in Samuel; 1,100, 000 in Chronicles, where _Israel_ would\nas so often denote both Israel and Judah) might well be explained as\nan allowance for the exclusion of Levi and Benjamin (see verse 6).\n\n_that drew sword_] All males over twenty years of age; compare Numbers\ni. 20.\n\n \u2076But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them: for the king\u2019s\n word was abominable to Joab.\n\n=6.= _Levi_] In Numbers i. 49 it is ordained that Levi is not to\nbe numbered among the children of Israel, i.e. treated as liable to\nmilitary service. The Levites were, however, numbered separately:\nNumbers iii. 15, xxvi. 57. In 2 Samuel there is nothing to correspond\nwith this verse, Levi and Benjamin being there reckoned in the census.\nWhy the Chronicler excludes Benjamin as well as Levi it is not easy to\nsee.\n\n \u2077And God was displeased with this thing; therefore he smote\n Israel.\n\n=7.= _he smote Israel_] with the plague.\n\n \u2078And David said unto God, I have sinned greatly, in that I have\n done this thing: but now, put away, I beseech thee, the iniquity\n of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly.\n\n=8.= _put away ... the iniquity_] Render perhaps, =remove the\npunishment=; compare Genesis iv. 13, Revised Version with margin:\nalso 1 Samuel xxviii. 10.\n\n \u2079And the LORD spake unto Gad, David\u2019s seer, saying,\n\n=9.= _And the LORD spake_] The historian now retraces his steps to\ndescribe the circumstances which heralded the approach of the plague.\n\n_Gad_] He is three times mentioned in Chronicles, each time as a\n\u201cseer,\u201d viz. xxi. 9 (= 2 Samuel xxiv. 11); xxix. 29; 2 Chronicles xxix.\n25. He was perhaps an older contemporary of Nathan, who bears the more\nmodern title of \u201cprophet\u201d (compare 1 Samuel ix. 9).\n\n \u00b9\u2070Go and speak unto David, saying, Thus saith the LORD, I offer\u00b9\n thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it\n unto thee. \u00b9\u00b9So Gad came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith\n the LORD, Take which thou wilt;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _stretch out unto_.\n\n=10.= _I offer thee three things_] The offer is a test of David\u2019s\ncharacter, just as God\u2019s different offer in 2 Chronicles i. 7 was a\ntest of Solomon\u2019s.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2either three years of famine; or three months to be consumed\n before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies\n overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even\u00b9\n pestilence in the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying\n throughout all the coasts of Israel. Now therefore consider what\n answer I shall return to him that sent me.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _and_.\n\n=12.= _three years of famine_] 2 Samuel, _seven years of famine_ (LXX.\nhowever _three_, as Chronicles).\n\n_three months to be consumed_] The correct text, however, is probably\nthat found in 2 Samuel xxiv. 13, _or wilt thou flee three months?_\n\n_the angel of the LORD_] Compare 2 Kings xix. 35; Acts xii. 23.\n\n_coasts_] Render, =borders=, i.e. through the whole land.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let me fall\n now into the hand of the LORD; for very great\u00b9 are his mercies:\n and let me not fall into the hand of man.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _many_.\n\n=13.= _into the hand of the LORD_] The answer reveals the sincerity and\nefficacy of David\u2019s penitence: a right spirit is renewed within him. He\nnow _chooses_ to trust in God.\n\n \u00b9\u2074So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel: and there fell of\n Israel seventy thousand men.\n\n=14.= _there fell of Israel_] 2 Samuel adds, _from Dan even to\nBeer-sheba_. The pestilence was throughout the whole land.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as\n he was about to destroy, the LORD beheld, and he repented him\n of the evil, and said to the destroying angel, It is enough;\n now stay thine hand. And the angel of the LORD stood by the\n threshing-floor of Ornan\u00b9 the Jebusite.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Samuel xxiv. 16, &c., _Araunah_.\n\n=15.= _unto Jerusalem_] The peril of the plague extends until Jerusalem\nitself is threatened.\n\n_he repented him_] Compare Genesis vi. 6; 1 Samuel xv. 11, 35; Jonah\niii. 10, etc.\n\n_It is enough_] The sudden cessation of this pestilence has numerous\nparallels in the history of epidemics.\n\n_the threshing-floor of Ornan_] The Chronicler makes this\nthreshing-floor the site of the Temple. The author of Samuel is silent\non the point. Compare notes on verses 25, 28, and especially xxii. 1.\n\n_Ornan_] This is the form of the name throughout this chapter, but in\n2 Samuel xxiv. the _\u1e32er\u012b_ gives everywhere _Araunah_. The _Keth\u012bb_ of\nSamuel, however, offers various forms, one of which (to be read _Ornah_,\nverse 16) approximates to the form given in Chronicles Variation in\nreproducing foreign names is common; see note on xviii. 5 (_Damascus_),\nand on 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 6 (_Nebuchadnezzar_).\n\n \u00b9\u2076And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the LORD\n stand between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in\n his hand stretched out over Jerusalem. Then David and the elders,\n clothed in sackcloth, fell upon their faces.\n\n=16.= _saw the angel_] The full description of the vision is peculiar\nto Chronicles; compare 2 Samuel xxiv. 17.\n\n_and the elders, clothed in sackcloth_] The wearing of sackcloth was\ndoubtless accompanied by fasting; compare Jonah iii. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And David said unto God, Is it not I that commanded the people\n to be numbered? even I it is that have sinned and done very\n wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done? let thine hand,\n I pray thee, O LORD my God, be against me, and against my\n father\u2019s house; but not against thy people, that they should be\n plagued. \u00b9\u2078Then the angel of the LORD commanded Gad to say to\n David, that David should go up, and rear an altar unto the LORD\n in the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. \u00b9\u2079And David went\n up at the saying of Gad, which he spake in the name of the LORD.\n\n=17.= _let thine hand ... be against me_] Compare Moses\u2019 intercession\nin Exodus xxxii. 32; but Moses was innocent, David guilty.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Ornan turned back, and saw the angel; and his four sons\n that were with him hid themselves. Now Ornan was threshing wheat.\n\n=20.= _hid themselves_] in fear, lest they too should see the angel of\nJehovah and their lives be thereby imperilled, compare Judges vi. 22,\nxiii. 22.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And as David came to Ornan, Ornan looked and saw David, and\n went out of the threshing-floor, and bowed himself to David with\n his face to the ground.\n\n=21.= _was threshing wheat_] By driving oxen over it; compare verse 23.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Then David said to Ornan, Give me the place of this\n threshing-floor, that I may build thereon an altar unto the LORD:\n for the full price shalt thou give it me: that the plague may be\n stayed from the people.\n\n=22.= _the place of this threshing-floor_] The expression\nimplies perhaps that David bought more than the mere area of the\nthreshing-floor.\n\n_for the full price_] Genesis xxiii. 9 (Revised Version).\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And Ornan said unto David, Take it to thee, and let my lord\n the king do that which is good in his eyes: lo, I give _thee_\n the oxen for burnt offerings, and the threshing instruments for\n wood, and the wheat for the meal offering; I give it all. \u00b2\u2074And\n king David said to Ornan, Nay; but I will verily buy it for the\n full price: for I will not take that which is thine for the LORD,\n nor offer a burnt offering without cost.\n\n=23.= _the meal offering_] Compare Leviticus ii. 1\u201216.\n\n \u00b2\u2075So David gave to Ornan for the place six hundred shekels of\n gold by weight.\n\n=25.= _gave ... for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight_]\nIn 2 Samuel xxiv. 24, _bought the threshing-floor and the oxen for\nfifty shekels of silver_. The huge discrepancy here between Chronicles\nand Samuel is noteworthy. If the price in Samuel, 50 shekels of silver\nfor threshing-floor and oxen, seems somewhat small (compared with the\n400 shekels paid by Abraham for the cave of Machpelah, Genesis xxiii.\n15\u201217), the 600 shekels of _gold_ in Chronicles is extravagantly\nlarge. It is accounted for by the fact that the Chronicler regarded the\ntransaction, not as the acquisition merely of the site for the altar\nbut of the area on which the Temple was afterwards built (see verse 22).\nNo sum could well seem too large for the purchase of ground destined to\nbe so holy. The figure 600 may have been chosen on the ground that it\nwas equal to a payment of 50 shekels for each tribe.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And David built there an altar unto the LORD, and offered\n burnt offerings and peace offerings, and called upon the LORD;\n and he answered him from heaven by fire upon the altar of burnt\n offering. \u00b2\u2077And the LORD commanded the angel; and he put up his\n sword again into the sheath thereof.\n\n=26.= _peace offerings_] See xvi. 1, note. At the end of the verse LXX.\n(compare Peshit\u1e6da) adds, _and consumed the burnt offering_. Compare\nLeviticus ix. 24; 1 Kings xviii. 38. The fire is not mentioned in\n2 Samuel.\n\n\n =CHAPTER XXI. 28\u2012CHAPTER XXII. 1.=\n THE SELECTION OF THE SITE OF THE TEMPLE.\n\n \u00b2\u2078At that time, when David saw that the LORD had answered him\n in the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite, then he sacrificed\n there.\n\n=28.= _At that time_, etc.] The construction of this section must\nbe carefully noted. chapter xxi. 28 is continued by chapter xxii. i,\nverses 29, 30 of chapter xxi. being a parenthesis. The division of\nchapters here is unfortunate.\n\n_At that time_] The phrase is taken up by \u201cThen\u201d of xxii. 1. The\nChronicler wishes us to note that David regarded the success of his\nintercession at the floor of Ornan as an indication that this floor\nwas God\u2019s approved site for the Temple.\n\n \u00b2\u2079For the tabernacle of the LORD, which Moses made in the\n wilderness, and the altar of burnt offering, were at that time\n in the high place at Gibeon.\n\n=29.= _For_] The beginning of a parenthesis.\n\n_the tabernacle of the LORD_] See the prefatory note to chapter xiii.;\nalso compare xvi. 1, 39, and 2 Chronicles i. 3.\n\n \u00b3\u2070But David could not go before it to inquire of God: for he was\n afraid because of the sword of the angel of the LORD.\n\n=30.= _he was afraid_] Or, =he was terrified=. The Hebrew word is\nunusual.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXII.\n\n\n \u00b9Then David said, This is the house of the LORD God, and this is\n the altar of burnt offering for Israel.\n\n=1.= _Then_] The word refers back to xxi. 28, _At that time_.\n\n_David said_] The king acts in conformity with the law contained in\nDeuteronomy xii. 5, 6.\n\n_This is the house of the LORD_, etc.] Hence the necessity for\nrelating the story of David\u2019s sinful action in taking the census. The\nChronicler\u2019s desire to show only the idealistic aspect of David\u2019s life\nhas frequently been pointed out. The present section, then, is notable\nas showing very clearly how even this desire was made to yield to the\nsupreme object of relating the Divinely-guided origin and growth of the\nTemple and its worship.\n\n\n =2\u201219.=\n DAVID\u2019S PREPARATIONS FOR BUILDING THE TEMPLE.\n HIS CHARGE TO SOLOMON AND TO THE PRINCES.\n\nIt is of course quite probable that preparations for a Temple were\nbegun in David\u2019s time, but the picture given in this chapter must\nnot be taken as historically true, the material being of a general\ncharacter such as the imagination could readily supply, and the figures\nmentioned in verse 14 being impossibly exaggerated. The chapter in fact\nis the outcome of the Chronicler\u2019s zealous but uncritical mind working\nin the belief that, not Solomon, but the pious David was the \u201cmoving\nspirit in the great enterprise.\u201d As Moses led Israel to Jordan\u2019s brink,\nso David (he thought) must stop short only at the actual building of\nthe Temple.\n\n \u00b2And David commanded to gather together the strangers that were\n in the land of Israel; and he set masons to hew wrought stones\n to build the house of God. \u00b3And David prepared iron in abundance\n for the nails for the doors of the gates, and for the couplings;\n and brass in abundance without weight;\n\n=2.= _the strangers_] Compare 2 Chronicles ii. 17; viii. 7\u20129. Hewing\nof stone was regarded as task-work unfit for free men. This verse is\nsimply an anticipation of the preparations recorded in Solomon\u2019s reign:\nsee 2 Chronicles ii. 1, 17.\n\n_wrought stones_] All the stone used for the building of the Temple was\npreviously cut to the right size; compare 1 Kings vi. 7.\n\n \u2074and cedar trees without number: for the Zidonians and they of\n Tyre brought cedar trees in abundance to David.\n\n=4.= _Zidonians and they of Tyre_] Compare 1 Kings v. 1\u20126 (15\u201220,\nHebrew).\n\n \u2075And David said, Solomon my son is young and tender, and the\n house that is to be builded for the LORD must be exceeding\n magnifical, of fame and of glory throughout all countries: I\n will therefore make preparation for it. So David prepared\n abundantly before his death.\n \u2076Then he called for Solomon his son, and charged him to build\n an house for the LORD, the God of Israel.\n\n=5.= _exceeding magnifical_] The Temple took seven years in building,\nand it was richly overlaid with gold, but its proportions were small,\nviz., about 90 ft. \u00d7 45 ft. \u00d7 30 ft. These small proportions, are not\nsurprising, for the Temple itself required only to be big enough to\nhold its furniture. The courts, however, were of large extent, that\nthey might afford room for worshippers at the times of the great feasts.\n\nNote the archaic _magnifical_ = _splendid_, _stately_ (magnificent).\nIt is found of course in the Authorized Version (1611), and also in\nthe Geneva Bible (1560); compare Starkey, _England_, ii. i. 176 (1538),\n\u201cGudly cytes and townys wyth magnyfycal and gudly housys.\u201d\n\n \u2077And David said to Solomon his son\u00b9, As for me, it was in my\n heart to build an house unto the name of the LORD my God.\n\n \u00b9 According to another reading, _My son, as for me &c._\n\n=7.= _said to Solomon his son_] So _Keth\u012bb_; the margin, =said to\nSolomon, My son=, follows the _\u1e32er\u012b_.\n\n_unto the name_] Compare Deuteronomy xii. 5; 2 Samuel vii. 13.\n\n \u2078But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, Thou hast shed\n blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build\n an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon\n the earth in my sight:\n\n=8.= _Thou hast shed blood abundantly_] Compare xxviii. 3; in 1 Kings\nv. 3 Solomon tells Hiram that David wished to build a temple, but was\nhindered from his design by war.\n\n \u2079behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest;\n and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for\n his name shall be Solomon\u00b9, and I will give peace and quietness\n unto Israel in his days:\n\n \u00b9 That is, _Peaceful_.\n\n=9.= _I will give him rest_] Compare 1 Kings v. 4. The promise\nhere made is of a period of peace sufficiently long for the work of\nTemple-building. Solomon\u2019s reign was not wholly peaceful; compare\n1 Kings xi. 14, 23, 26.\n\n \u00b9\u2070he shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son,\n and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his\n kingdom over Israel for ever. \u00b9\u00b9Now, my son, the LORD be with\n thee; and prosper thou, and build the house of the LORD thy God,\n as he hath spoken concerning thee. \u00b9\u00b2Only the LORD give thee\n discretion and understanding, and give thee charge concerning\n Israel; that so thou mayest keep the law of the LORD thy God.\n\n=10.= _for ever_] Compare 2 Samuel vii. 13\u201216.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3Then shalt thou prosper, if thou observe to do the statutes\n and the judgements which the LORD charged Moses with concerning\n Israel: be strong, and of good courage; fear not, neither be\n dismayed.\n\n=13.= _be strong, and of good courage_] Compare Joshua i. 9.\n\n \u00b9\u2074Now, behold, in my affliction\u00b9 I have prepared for the house\n of the LORD an hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand\n thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight;\n for it is in abundance: timber also and stone have I prepared;\n and thou mayest add thereto.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _low estate_.\n\n=14.= _in my affliction_] LXX. \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c7\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5, and so margin _in\nmy low estate_. The exact meaning of the phrase is not quite certain.\nDoes it refer to the comparative slenderness of David\u2019s resources (_in\nmy poverty_), or to the difficulties of the wars and rebellions which\nmarked his reign, or does it cover both ideas? Render perhaps =in my\nstraitened circumstances=. Some translate =by my strenuous labour=\n(compare xxix. 2), but there is insufficient evidence for rendering the\nHebrew word by _labour_.\n\n_an hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents\nof silver_] This sum is incredibly large. In 1 Kings x. 14 it is\ntold in illustration of the riches of Solomon\u2015\u2015a wealthier king than\nDavid\u2015\u2015that he received in one year 666 talents of gold, but even\nat this rate David would have amassed only 26,640 talents in forty\nyears, and further the sum assigned to Solomon as his yearly revenue\nis fantastically large, see note 2 Chronicles ix. 13. The passage\nillustrates the exaggeration which is so characteristic of midrashic\nstyle; compare xxix. 4, and the note on 2 Chronicles xvii. 14.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Moreover there are workmen with thee in abundance, hewers and\n workers of stone and timber, and all men that are cunning in any\n manner of work; \u00b9\u2076of the gold, the silver, and the brass, and\n the iron, there is no number; arise and be doing, and the LORD\n be with thee. \u00b9\u2077David also commanded all the princes of Israel\n to help Solomon his son, _saying_,\n\n=15, 16.= _any manner of work; of the gold ... there is no number_]\nRender =in every work of gold ... without number=; i.e. the two verses\nare to be read in close connection.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Is not the LORD your God with you? and hath he not given you\n rest on every side? for he hath delivered the inhabitants of the\n land into mine hand; and the land is subdued before the LORD,\n and before his people.\n\n=18.= _the inhabitants of the land_] Compare xi. 4, _the Jebusites, the\ninhabitants of the land_. The remnant of the earlier inhabitants of\nCanaan is meant.\n\n \u00b9\u2079Now set your heart and your soul to seek after the LORD your\n God; arise therefore, and build ye the sanctuary of the LORD\n God, to bring the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and the holy\n vessels of God, into the house that is to be built to the name\n of the LORD.\n\n=19.= _and the holy vessels of God_] Compare 1 Kings viii. 4.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS XXIII.\u2012XXIX.\n THE CONCLUSION OF DAVID\u2019S REIGN.\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIII.\n\n\n =1.=\n SOLOMON MADE KING.\n\n \u00b9Now David was old and full of days; and he made Solomon his\n son king over Israel.\n\nThe Chronicler unhistorically ignores the struggle between the parties\nof Solomon and of Adonijah for the throne (compare xxix. 22 f.; 1 Kings\ni. 5 ff.), and makes the reign of David culminate in the appointment\nof Solomon as David\u2019s successor and in a grand organisation of the\necclesiastical and other authorities of the realm. chapter xxiii. 1\nintimates the appointment of Solomon and the assembling by royal\ncommand of the princes, priests, and Levites of Israel. The topics\nthus suggested are then, after the prevailing fashion of Chronicles,\ntreated in the reverse order; first the Levites, chapter xxiii.; then\nthe priests, xxiv. (followed by the singers, xxv.; and the doorkeepers,\nxxvi.); then the civil and military orders. chapters xxviii., xxix. are\noccupied with the concluding exhortations of King David. Compare xxix.\n22\u201224; 1 Kings i. 5\u201253.\n\n\n =2\u201223.=\n ORGANISATION OF THE LEVITES (first account).\n\n \u00b2And he gathered together all the princes of Israel, with the\n priests and the Levites. \u00b3And the Levites were numbered from\n thirty years old and upward: and their number by their polls,\n man by man, was thirty and eight thousand.\n\n=3.= _the Levites were numbered from thirty years_] Two accounts are\nhere given of the organisation of the Levites. According to the first\nthe Levites were admitted to service at thirty years of age; verse 3;\ncompare Numbers iv. 3, 23, 30, where the period from thirty to fifty\nis fixed as the period for service. According to the second account\n(verses 24\u201227) the Levites were taken from twenty years old and upwards;\nthis was apparently the later custom; compare 2 Chronicles xxxi. 17;\nEzra iii. 8. The discrepancy probably arises from an actual variation\nin practice. The original age of admission for Levites was probably\nthirty, but owing to the scarcity of their numbers it seems to have\nbeen necessary to reduce the limit of age to twenty. But see also the\nnote on pp. 51 f.\n\n_by their polls_] Literally _by their skulls_. \u201cPoll\u201d is an almost\nobsolete word for \u201chead,\u201d retained in the compound word, \u201cpoll-tax.\u201d\n\n_thirty and eight thousand_] Numbers iii. 39 gives 22,000, and Numbers\nxxvi. 62, 23,000, as the number of male Levites from a month old and\nupwards in the time of Moses.\n\n \u2074Of these, twenty and four thousand were to oversee the work of\n the house of the LORD; and six thousand were officers and judges:\n\n=4.= _twenty and four thousand_] These were divided into courses (verse\n6), serving by turn, apparently twenty-four in number, consisting each\nof a thousand men. See, however, the note on verses 6\u201223 below.\n\n_to oversee the work_] It is true that there were some Temple servants\nsubordinate to the Levites\u2015\u2015see note on the _Nethinim_, ix. 2. But the\nduty of the Levites was to perform the work of the Temple (as is said\ne.g. in verses 24, 28), not to act as overseers of the work of others.\nIt is therefore to be inferred that the \u201cwork\u201d spoken of here and\nin verse 5 is not the routine duties of the Temple but the work of\nits construction. Adding the Levites of verse 4 to the officers,\ndoorkeepers, and musicians of verse 5, we have a total of 38,000\noverseers: that the number is incredibly large is no objection in\nChronicles.\n\n_officers and judges_] Compare 2 Chronicles xix. 8, 11. According to\nDeuteronomy xvii. 9 (compare Deuteronomy xvi. 18) the _harder_ causes\nwere reserved for \u201cthe priests the Levites,\u201d ordinary causes being\ndecided by judges who were not Levites.\n\n \u2075and four thousand were doorkeepers; and four thousand praised\n the LORD with the instruments which I made, _said David_, to\n praise therewith.\n\n=5.= _doorkeepers_] The courses and duties of these are given in xxvi.\n1\u201219.\n\n_four thousand praised the LORD_] Compare xxv. 1\u201231, which tells of\na picked choir consisting of 288 persons, divided into twenty-four\ncourses, whose special duty was psalmody.\n\n_the instruments which I made_] Compare 2 Chronicles xxix. 26.\n\n=6\u201223.= It is natural to expect that twenty-four heads of fathers\u2019\nhouses will appear in this list (compare note on verse 4), in\nharmony with the twenty-four courses of priests, of musicians, and of\ndoorkeepers referred to in the chapters following. The present text,\nhowever, appears to yield but twenty-two, and the various emendations\nsuggested in order to obtain twenty-four are all precarious. The best\nsuggestion is that of Curtis, for which see note on verse 22.\n\n \u2076And David divided them into courses\u00b9 according to the sons of\n Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _divisions_.\n\n=6.= _the sons of Levi_] Compare vi. 1, 16.\n\n \u2077Of the Gershonites; Ladan\u00b9 and Shimei. \u2078The sons of Ladan;\n Jehiel the chief, and Zetham, and Joel, three.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter vi. 17, _Libni_.\n\n=7.= _Ladan and Shimei_] For \u201cLadan\u201d here and in xxvi. 21 we have in\nvi. 17 and Exodus vi. 17 \u201cLibni.\u201d\n\n \u2079The sons of Shimei; Shelomoth, and Haziel, and Haran, three.\n These were the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of Ladan.\n\n=9.= _The sons of Shimei_] This Shimei in distinction from the Shimei\nof verses 7, 10 might conceivably be a descendant of Ladan, although\nthe relationship is not indicated; but it is more probable that some\nconfusion has come into the text of verses 8, 9, 10\u2015\u2015as e.g. that verse\n9b \u201cThese were ... of Ladan\u201d is a gloss, and that for _Shimei_ in verse\n10 we should read _Shelomoth_.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the sons of Shimei; Jahath, Zina\u00b9, and Jeush, and Beriah.\n These four were the sons of Shimei. \u00b9\u00b9And Jahath was the chief,\n and Zizah the second: but Jeush and Beriah had not many sons;\n therefore they became a fathers\u2019 house in one reckoning.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 11, _Zizah_.\n\n=10.= _Zina_] Better, as in verse 11, _Zizah_; the two words are\nreadily confused in Hebrew writing.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2The sons of Kohath; Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, four.\n\n=12.= _The sons of Kohath_] Compare vi. 2; Exodus vi. 18.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3The sons of Amram; Aaron and Moses: and Aaron was separated,\n that he should sanctify\u00b9 the most holy things, he and his sons,\n for ever, to burn incense before the LORD, to minister unto him,\n and to bless in his name, for ever.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _to sanctify as most holy him &c._\n\n=13.= _separated_] i.e. set apart, sometimes with the additional\nmeaning of making a distinction between sacred and common. Compare\nRomans i. 1, where St Paul describes himself as _separated unto the\ngospel of God_; Acts xiii. 2; Galatians i. 15.\n\n_the most holy things_] Such for instance as the altar of incense\n(Exodus xxx. 1\u201210), or again the shewbread (Leviticus xxiv. 5\u20129).\n\n_to bless_] compare Numbers vi. 23\u201227.\n\n \u00b9\u2074But as for Moses the man of God, his sons were named among the\n tribe of Levi.\n\n=14.= _among the tribe of Levi_] The descendants of Moses as\ndistinguished from those of Aaron had the standing, not of priests but\nof Levites.\n\n \u00b9\u2075The sons of Moses; Gershom and Eliezer.\n\n=15.= _Gershom and Eliezer_] Compare Exodus xviii. 3, 4.\n\n \u00b9\u2076The sons of Gershom; Shebuel\u00b9 the chief.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xxiv. 20, _Shubael_.\n\n=16.= _The sons_] compare the following verse; also ii. 31, where the\nplural, _The sons_, is thrice followed by a single name only.\n\n_Shebuel_] rather, as in xxiv. 20, Shubael; so LXX. here.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And the sons of Eliezer were, Rehabiah the chief. And Eliezer\n had none other sons; but the sons of Rehabiah were very many.\n\n=17.= _Rehabiah_] Compare xxiv. 21.\n\n \u00b9\u2078The sons of Izhar; Shelomith\u00b9 the chief.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xxiv. 22, _Shelomoth_.\n\n=18.= _Shelomith_] In xxiv. 22, _Shelomoth_.\n\n \u00b9\u2079The sons of Hebron; Jeriah the chief, Amariah the second,\n Jahaziel the third, and Jekameam the fourth.\n\n=19.= _The sons of Hebron_] Compare xxiv. 23.\n\n \u00b2\u2070The sons of Uzziel; Micah the chief, and Isshiah the second.\n\n=20.= _The sons of Uzziel_] Compare xxiv. 24. Nine Kohathite families\nseem to be here reckoned.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9The sons of Merari; Mahli and Mushi. The sons of Mahli;\n Eleazar and Kish.\n\n=21.= _The sons of Merari_] Compare xxiv. 26.\n\n_The sons of Mahli_] Compare xxiv. 28, 29.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Eleazar died, and had no sons, but daughters only: and\n their brethren the sons of Kish took them _to wife_.\n\n=22.= _their brethren_] Their kinsmen.\n\n_took them_ to wife] i.e. in accordance with the law stated in Numbers\nxxvii. 4, compare Numbers xxxvi. 6, whereby daughters had a right of\ninheritance in hope of perpetuating the name of him who died without\nmale heirs. Thus Eleazar, by his family through the female line, may be\nreckoned one of the heads of fathers\u2019 houses. If this view be correct,\nthe list contains not twenty-two but twenty-three \u201cheads\u201d; and it may\nbe conjectured that the one name more required to make up the desired\ntotal of twenty-four has been lost in the transmission of the text.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3The sons of Mushi; Mahli, and Eder, and Jeremoth, three.\n\n=23.= _The sons of Mushi_] Compare xxiv. 30.\n\n\n =24\u201227.=\n ORGANISATION OF THE LEVITES (second account).\n\n \u00b2\u2074These were the sons of Levi after their fathers\u2019 houses, even\n the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of those of them that were\n counted, in the number of names by their polls, who did the work\n for the service of the house of the LORD, from twenty years old\n and upward. \u00b2\u2075For David said, The LORD, the God of Israel, hath\n given rest unto his people; and he dwelleth in Jerusalem for\n ever: \u00b2\u2076and also the Levites shall no more have need to carry\n the tabernacle and all the vessels of it for the service thereof.\n \u00b2\u2077For by the last words\u00b9 of David the sons of Levi were numbered,\n from twenty years old and upward.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in the last acts_.\n\n=24.= _from twenty years old and upward_] The striking divergence\nbetween this verse and verse 3, where _thirty_ is given as the minimum\nage for service as a Levite, has given rise to much discussion\u2015\u2015see the\nnote to verse 3. No doubt the concluding remarks of that note are true\nhistorically: a change in the inferior age limit of the Levites _did_\ntake place at some time on account of the need for larger numbers in\noffice. But neither that fact, nor the theory (which is hardly borne\nout by other considerations) that the Chronicler has used varying\ntraditions from two different sources, suffices to explain why he\nleft the evident contradiction in his narrative. The desirability of\nexplaining this circumstance strongly favours the view urged by Curtis,\nthat in verses 3 ff. the Chronicler meant to describe the Levitical\norganisation during and for the purpose of the preparation and erection\nof the Temple, whilst verses 24 ff. relate to the period when the\nTemple was completed and the duties of the Levites, being both more\nnumerous and at the same time of a more mechanical nature, might well\nseem to call for an increase in the number of those officiating. When\nthe reduction of the age limit to _twenty_ actually took place is of\ncourse immaterial; but it is quite in keeping with the manner of the\nChronicler that he should thus carry both arrangements back to the time\nof David.\n\n\n =28\u201232.=\n DUTIES OF THE LEVITES.\n\n \u00b2\u2078For their office\u00b9 was to wait on the sons of Aaron for the\n service of the house of the LORD, in the courts, and in the\n chambers, and in the purifying of all holy things, even the work\n of the service of the house of God;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _their station was at the hand of the sons of Aaron_.\n See Nehemiah xi. 24.\n\n=28.= _their office was to wait on_] Literally, as margin, _their\nstation was at the hand of_. For the phrase _at the hand of_ compare\nPsalms cxxiii. 2, _as the eyes of servants look unto the hand of their\nmaster_.\n\n_the chambers_] compare ix. 26, note.\n\n \u00b2\u2079for the shewbread also, and for the fine flour for a meal\n offering, whether of unleavened wafers, or of that which is\n baked in the pan, or of that which is soaked, and for all manner\n of measure and size;\n\n=29.= _for the shewbread_] i.e. for the preparation of the shewbread\n(compare ix. 32).\n\n_that which is soaked_] Compare Leviticus vi. 21 [14, Hebrew].\n\n_for all manner of measure and size_] i.e. for measuring the component\nparts of the meal-offering, etc.\n\n \u00b3\u2070and to stand every morning to thank and praise the LORD, and\n likewise at even;\n\n=30.= _every morning ... and likewise at even_] Corresponding with the\ndaily morning and evening sacrifice; compare Exodus xxix. 38, 39.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9and to offer all burnt offerings unto the LORD, in the\n sabbaths, in the new moons, and on the set feasts, in number\n according to the ordinance concerning them, continually before\n the LORD:\n\n=31.= _to offer all burnt offerings_] This was the duty not of the\nLevites, who were to stand near-by praising Jehovah (verse 30), but of\nthe priests. The apparent difficulty is due to a mistranslation: render\n=and= (to stand, i.e. assist) =at every offering of burnt offerings=.\n\n_the set feasts_] i.e. the yearly feasts; Exodus xxiii. 14\u201217.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2and that they should keep the charge of the tent of meeting,\n and the charge of the holy place, and the charge of the sons of\n Aaron their brethren, for the service of the house of the LORD.\n\n=32.= _the charge of the holy place_] This duty is assigned to Levites\nin Numbers iii. 28, 32; is restricted and confined to such Levites\nas were sons of Kohath in Numbers iv. 15; and according to a variant\ntradition in Numbers xviii. 5 is assigned to the priests.\n\n_the charge of the sons of Aaron_] Compare Numbers xviii. 1\u20127.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIV.\n\n\n =1\u201219.=\n DAVID\u2019S ORGANISATION OF THE PRIESTS BY COURSES.\n\n \u00b9And the courses of the sons of Aaron _were these_. The sons of\n Aaron; Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar.\n\n=1.= _the sons of Aaron_] So vi. 3; Exodus vi. 23.\n\n \u00b2But Nadab and Abihu died before their father, and had no\n children: therefore Eleazar and Ithamar executed the priest\u2019s\n office.\n\n=2.= _Nadab and Abihu died_] by fire from heaven as a punishment for\nsacrilege\u2015\u2015so Leviticus x. 1, 2; Numbers iii. 4.\n\n \u00b3And David\u00b9 with Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of\n the sons of Ithamar, divided them according to their ordering in\n their service.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _And David divided them, even Zadok &c._\n\n=3.= _Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar_] The colleague of Zadok in the\npriesthood is variously named in different passages:\u2015\u2015\n\n 1 Chronicles xxiv. 3. Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar.\n\n 1 Chronicles xxiv. 6. Ahimelech the son of Abiathar.\n\n 1 Chronicles xviii. 16. Abimelech the son of Abiathar.\n\nProbably the same person is meant throughout, the confusion springing\nfrom a false reading in 2 Samuel viii. 17, _Ahimelech the son of\nAbiathar_ for _Abiathar the son of Ahimelech_; see the notes on xv. 11,\nxviii. 16.\n\n_according to their ordering_] i.e. according to the arrangement which\nfollows; compare verse 19.\n\n \u2074And there were more chief men found of the sons of Eleazar than\n of the sons of Ithamar; and _thus_ were they divided: of the\n sons of Eleazar there were sixteen, heads of fathers\u2019 houses;\n and of the sons of Ithamar, according to their fathers\u2019 houses,\n eight.\n\n=4.= _more chief men found of the sons of Eleazar than ... of Ithamar_]\nThe superiority of the Zadokites (sons of Eleazar) in the post-exilic\nperiod is read back into the days of David, and construed in the terms\nof a right of primogeniture: thus the proportion assigned here is\nsixteen to eight, i.e. Eleazar\u2019s descendants have a double portion,\nbesides the right of the High-priesthood.\n\n \u2075Thus were they divided by lot, one sort with another; for there\n were princes of the sanctuary, and princes of God, both of the\n sons of Eleazar, and of the sons of Ithamar.\n\n=5.= _one sort with another_] i.e. sons of Eleazar with sons of Ithamar.\n\n_there were princes of the sanctuary, and princes of God, both of\nthe sons_, etc.] The _princes of the sanctuary_ (Isaiah xliii. 28)\nare probably the same as the _princes of God_ and as the _chiefs\nof the priests_ (2 Chronicles xxxvi. 14). The Hebrew expression in\n2 Chronicles xxxv. 8 is different (_rulers of the house of God_).\n\n \u2076And Shemaiah the son of Nethanel the scribe, who was of the\n Levites, wrote them in the presence of the king, and the princes,\n and Zadok the priest, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, and the\n heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of the priests and of the Levites:\n one fathers\u2019 house being taken for Eleazar, and one taken\u00b9 for\n Ithamar.\n\n \u00b9 The Hebrew text has, _taken, taken_.\n\n=6.= _the scribe, who was of the Levites_] so designated in order to\ndistinguish him from the _king\u2019s scribe_ (compare 2 Chronicles xxiv.\n11).\n\n_one taken_] This rendering involves a simple and entirely probable\ncorrection of the Hebrew The alternate drawing here described could\nhave lasted only for the first sixteen lots; in the last eight drawings\nthe descendants of Eleazar must have drawn against each other only;\ncompare verse 4, and the similar procedure described in xxv. 9\u201231.\n\n \u2077Now the first lot came forth to Jehoiarib, the second to\n Jedaiah;\n\n=7.= _Jehoiarib_] Lists of the priestly families occur also Nehemiah\nx. 2\u20128, xii. 1\u20127, 12\u201221. Compare Ryle (on Nehemiah xii. 1) for a\ndiscussion of the names. For _Jehoiarib_ see ix. 10, note.\n\n \u2078the third to Harim, the fourth to Seorim;\n\n=8.= _Harim_] So Nehemiah x. 5, xii. 15, but in Nehemiah xii. 3,\n\u201cRehum.\u201d The confusion of form is easy in Hebrew writing.\n\n \u2079the fifth to Malchijah, the sixth to Mijamin;\n\n=9.= _Mijamin_] So Nehemiah x. 7, xii. 5; but xii. 17, \u201cMiniamin.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2070the seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abijah;\n\n=10.= _Hakkoz_] Called \u201cKoz\u201d in Ezra ii. 61; Nehemiah iii. 4, 21\n(Revised Version \u201cHakkoz\u201d in all three places; so also in 1 Chronicles\niv. 8 where a Calebite _Koz_ is mentioned). Unable to trace their\ngenealogy in the records after the Return, this family is stated in\nEzra (ii. 61) to have been deprived of their right to the priesthood.\n\n_Abijah_] So Nehemiah x. 7, xii. 4, 17. Zacharias, the father of John\nthe Baptist, was of the course of Abiah (Revised Version _Abijah_);\nLuke i. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9the ninth to Jeshua, the tenth to Shecaniah;\n\n=11.= _Jeshua_] This is the Hebrew name expressed by \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 in Greek,\nand by \u201cJesus\u201d in English. The high-priest under whom the second Temple\nwas built bore this name according to Ezra iii. 2, v. 2.\n\n_Shecaniah_] So Nehemiah xii. 3; but Nehemiah x. 4, xii. 14,\n\u201cShebaniah.\u201d The Hebrew letters transliterated _b_ and _c_ are easily\nconfused.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2the eleventh to Eliashib, the twelfth to Jakim; \u00b9\u00b3the\n thirteenth to Huppah, the fourteenth to Jeshebeab;\n\n=12.= _Eliashib_] A priest of this name is mentioned Nehemiah xiii. 4\u20127.\n\n \u00b9\u2074the fifteenth to Bilgah, the sixteenth to Immer; \u00b9\u2075the\n seventeenth to Hezir, the eighteenth to Happizzez;\n\n=14.= _Bilgah_] \u201cBilgah\u201d (Nehemiah xii. 5) appears as a priest or\npriestly family in the time of the Return, and (under the form \u201cBilgai,\u201d\nNehemiah x. 8) in the time of Nehemiah.\n\n_Immer_] compare ix. 12; Ezra ii. 37; Jeremiah xx. 1.\n\n \u00b9\u2076the nineteenth to Pethahiah, the twentieth to Jehezkel;\n\n=16.= _Jehezkel_] a more correct form of \u201cEzekiel,\u201d the name of the\npriest-prophet of the Captivity.\n\n \u00b9\u2077the one and twentieth to Jachin, the two and twentieth to\n Gamul;\n\n=17.= _Jachin_] Compare ix. 10 (= Nehemiah xi. 10).\n\n \u00b9\u2078the three and twentieth to Delaiah, the four and twentieth\n to Maaziah. \u00b9\u2079This was the ordering of them in their service,\n to come into the house of the LORD according to the ordinance\n _given_ unto them by the hand of Aaron their father, as the LORD,\n the God of Israel, had commanded him.\n\n=18.= _Maaziah_] Nehemiah x. 8 (x. 9, Hebrew).\n\n\n =20\u201231= (compare xxiii. 13\u201223).\n FAMILIES OF THE LEVITES.\n\nThese verses repeat the list of Levitic families given in xxiii. 6\u201223\nwith the important omission of the whole of the Gershonites (xxiii.\n6\u201211), but with some additions to the Kohathite and Merarite families.\nFurther, six \u201cheads\u201d of classes mentioned in xxiii. are here replaced\nby new names. These features, together with several details, point to\nthe conclusion that the present list is the work of a later writer than\nthe Chronicler.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And of the rest of the sons of Levi: of the sons of Amram,\n Shubael\u00b9; of the sons of Shubael, Jehdeiah.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xxiii. 16, _Shebuel_.\n\n=20= _And of the rest of the sons of Levi: of_, etc.] These are\nprobably the words of the glossator, introducing the list which follows\nand which he intended as a corrective to the list in xxiii. 6\u201223.\n\n_Amram_] The four Kohathite families are now noticed in order, viz.\nAmram, Izhar (verse 22), Hebron (verse 23), Uzziel (verse 24).\n\n_Shubael_] Called \u201cShebuel\u201d in xxiii. 16, xxvi. 24.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9Of Rehabiah: of the sons of Rehabiah, Isshiah the chief.\n\n=21.= _Of Rahabiah_] He (like Shubael) was descended from Moses; xxiii.\n15\u201217.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Of the Izharites, Shelomoth\u00b9; of the sons of Shelomoth, Jahath.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xxiii. 18, _Shelomith_.\n\n=22.= _Shelomoth_] Called \u201cShelomith\u201d in xxiii. 18.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And the sons _of Hebron_; Jeriah _the chief_, Amariah the\n second, Jahaziel the third, Jekameam the fourth. \u00b2\u2074The sons of\n Uzziel, Micah; of the sons of Micah, Shamir. \u00b2\u2075The brother of\n Micah, Isshiah: of the sons of Isshiah, Zechariah.\n\n=23.= _And the sons_ of Hebron; _Jeriah_ the chief] The words _of\nHebron_ and _the chief_ which are printed in italics in the text above\nhave been omitted in the Hebrew by some error of transmission. They are\nrightly restored in accordance with xxiii. 19.\n\n \u00b2\u2076The sons of Merari; Mahli and Mushi: the sons of Jaaziah; Beno.\n \u00b2\u2077The sons of Merari; of Jaaziah, Beno, and Shoham, and Zaccur,\n and Ibri.\n\n=26.= _The sons of Merari_] In xxiii. 21 only two families of Merari\nare mentioned, viz., Mahli and Mushi. Here however a third family \u201cthe\nsons of Jaaziah\u201d is mentioned. Probably the fuller text is right to\nthis extent that there was a family tracing their ancestry to Jaaziah\nand claiming that this Jaaziah was of Merarite descent; but is wrong\nin making Jaaziah an immediate son of Merari, parallel with the famous\nMahli and Mushi. Hence the following word _Beno_ (literally _his son_)\nshould probably be struck out as an erroneous gloss (see also verse 27).\n\n_of Jaaziah; Beno_] Either delete _Beno_ (see previous note) or perhaps\nread _Bani_.\n\n \u00b2\u2078Of Mahli; Eleazar, who had no sons. \u00b2\u2079Of Kish; the sons of\n Kish, Jerahmeel.\n\n=28.= _Eleazar_] Compare xxiii. 22.\n\n \u00b3\u2070And the sons of Mushi; Mahli, and Eder, and Jerimoth. These\n were the sons of the Levites after their fathers\u2019 houses.\n\n=30.= _Jerimoth_] Spelt \u201cJeremoth\u201d in xxiii. 23.\n\n_These were ... houses_] = xxiii. 24a.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9These likewise cast lots even as their brethren the sons\n of Aaron in the presence of David the king, and Zadok, and\n Ahimelech, and the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of the priests\n and of the Levites; the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of the chief even as\n those of his younger brother.\n\n=31.= _and Ahimelech_] We expect _and Abiathar_; compare verse 3,\nxv. 11, xviii. 16, with the notes.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXV.\n\n\n =1\u20127.=\n THE FAMILIES OF THE SINGERS.\n\nThe Chronicler displays so much interest in the liturgical worship of\nthe Temple that it is very probable that he was himself a member of the\nmusical guilds. There is no reason to question the importance of the\nmusicians in the Temple worship of the late post-exilic period. But the\ndevelopment of their organisation and duties was certainly a gradual\nprocess, and did not, as the Chronicler here represents, spring into\nbeing, full-grown, in the days of David. Three classes\u2015\u2015the sons of\nAsaph, Heman, and Jeduthun (= Ethan) had come to be clearly recognised.\nThey are here regarded as divided into twenty-four courses (like the\nLevites and Priests), but that this even in the Chronicler\u2019s time\nrepresents not an actuality but an ideal is suggested by the artificial\ncharacter of the names which conclude the list\u2015\u2015see verse 4, note on\n_Hananiah_.\n\n \u00b9Moreover David and the captains of the host separated for\n the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of\n Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and\n with cymbals: and the number of them that did the work according\n to their service was:\n\n=1.= _Moreover David_] Render, =And David=.\n\n_separated_] compare xxiii. 13, note.\n\n_who should prophesy_] i.e. sing and praise in the manner of the\nprophets, compare 1 Samuel x. 5. There is no reference to the\npredictive power or the higher spiritual activities of the great\nprophets. Nevertheless the term serves, and is intended, to invest\nthe office of the musicians with a greater honour than that of the\nministrant Levites.\n\n_psalteries_] See xiii. 8, note.\n\n \u00b2of the sons of Asaph; Zaccur, and Joseph, and Nethaniah, and\n Asharelah\u00b9, the sons of Asaph; under the hand of Asaph, who\n prophesied after the order\u00b2 of the king.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 14, _Jesharelah_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _by the hands of the king_.\n\n=2.= _Asaph_] See xv. 17, note.\n\n_Asharelah_] In verse 14, \u201cJesharelah.\u201d\n\n_after the order_] All was done according to the order established by\nking David.\n\n \u00b3Of Jeduthun: the sons of Jeduthun; Gedaliah, and Zeri\u00b9, and\n Jeshaiah, Hashabiah, and Mattithiah, six\u00b2; under the hands of\n their father Jeduthun with the harp, who prophesied in giving\n thanks and praising the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 11, _Izri_.\n\n \u00b2 With Shimei, mentioned in verse 17.\n\n=3.= _Jeduthun_] See xvi. 41, note.\n\n_Zeri_] read as in verse 11, =Izri=.\n\n_Jeshaiah_] After Jeshaiah LXX. B inserts the name \u201cShimei\u201d (\u03a3\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03b5\u1f76),\nno doubt rightly for (1)\u00a0six sons are reckoned in this verse, (2)\u00a0the\n\u201cShimei\u201d of verse 17 is otherwise unmentioned in verses 2\u20124, though his\ntwenty-three companions are named.\n\n \u2074Of Heman: the sons of Heman; Bukkiah, Mattaniah, Uzziel\u00b9,\n Shebuel\u00b2, and Jerimoth, Hananiah, Hanani, Eliathah, Giddalti,\n and Romamti-ezer, Joshbekashah, Mallothi, Hothir, Mahazioth:\n\n \u00b9 In verse 18, _Azarel_.\n\n \u00b2 In verse 20, _Shubael_.\n\n=4.= _Heman_] See xv. 17, note.\n\n_Uzziel_] In verse 18, \u201cAzarel.\u201d The variation between the two\nwords when written with Hebrew consonants is small. Compare note on\n2 Chronicles xxvi. 1 (\u201cUzziah\u201d and \u201cAzariah\u201d).\n\n_Shebuel_] In verse 20, \u201cShubael.\u201d\n\n_Jerimoth_] In verse 22, \u201cJeremoth.\u201d\n\n _Hananiah_, _Hanani_] _Hananiah_, which signifies \u201cJehovah (Jah) is\ngracious,\u201d and _Hanani_ (probably a contraction of _Hananiah_) are\nnames found not infrequently in the Old Testament; but the following\nseven words are practically impossible as proper names, and the nine\nwords together, with some easy alterations, actually form a poetical\npetition, which may be rendered thus:\n\n \u201cBe gracious unto me, O God; be gracious unto me!\n Thou art my God.\n Thou hast magnified and exalted help for him that sat in distress.\n Thou hast given visions abundantly.\u201d\n\nWhat explanation can be offered of this startling fact? It may be\nthat the names are wholly artificial, invented by the Chronicler to\nfill out the desired twenty-four courses (see the head-note above),\nbut the device is clumsy and the Chronicler was not likely to be\nbankrupt for names. Perhaps by a curious chance the original names\nbore some _slight_ resemblance to a sentence such as the above, and\nthe resemblance has at some time been perfected by a fanciful scribe.\n\n \u2075all these were the sons of Heman the king\u2019s seer in the words\n of God, to lift up the horn. And God gave to Heman fourteen\n sons and three daughters. \u2076All these were under the hands of\n their father for song in the house of the LORD, with cymbals,\n psalteries, and harps, for the service of the house of God;\n Asaph\u00b9, Jeduthun, and Heman being under the order of the king.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _after the order of the king_, even _Asaph_ &c.\n\n=5.= _the king\u2019s seer_] This title is given to Gad in xxi. 9, and to\nAsaph, Heman and Jeduthun, all three in 2 Chronicles xxxv. 15 (LXX. not\nHebrew).\n\n_in the words of God_] The exact meaning of this is uncertain; it may\neither mean \u201cin Divine things\u201d (i.e. arrangements for worship), or \u201cby\nDivine appointment\u201d (compare 2 Chronicles xxix. 15 \u201cby the words of the\nLORD\u201d).\n\n_to lift up the horn_] i.e. to make loud blasts upon the horn; but a\nslightly different division of the Hebrew consonants should probably\nbe made and the phrase connected with the following verse. Render\ntherefore, =To lift up the horn= (i.e. to increase his power) =God gave\nto Heman=, etc.\n\n_fourteen sons_] Corresponding with the fourteen names given in verse 4.\n\n \u2077And the number of them, with their brethren that were\n instructed in singing unto the LORD, even all that were skilful,\n was two hundred fourscore and eight.\n\n=7.= _two hundred fourscore and eight_] The number corresponds with the\ntwenty-four courses of twelve members each about to be enumerated.\n\n\n =8\u201231.=\n THE ALLOTMENT OF THE COURSES.\n\n \u2078And they cast lots for their charges\u00b9, all alike, as well the\n small as the great, the teacher as the scholar.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _ward against_ ward, _as well_ &c.\n\n=8.= _for their charges, all alike_] _charges_, i.e. duties. The Hebrew\ntext is faulty, but the Revised Version rendering probably represents\nthe right reading.\n\n_the teacher as the scholar_] LXX. \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd (i.e. _the\ninitiated and the learners_). For a similar inclusive phrase compare\nthe Arabic \u201che that giveth to hear and he that heareth,\u201d and see\nfurther references in Driver, Deuteronomy (International _Crititcal\nCommentary_), p. 376. Instead of \u201cthe teacher\u201d we may render \u201cthe\nskilful\u201d as in verse 7; the Hebrew word is the same. It is to be noted\nthat we have here twenty-four courses of singers corresponding with the\ntwenty-four courses of the priests.\n\n \u2079Now the first lot came forth for Asaph to Joseph: the second to\n Gedaliah; he and his brethren and sons were twelve: \u00b9\u2070the third\n to Zaccur, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n\n=9.= _for Asaph_] A comparison of verses 9\u201231 with verses 2\u20124 shows\nthat the first, third, fifth and seventh lots fell to Asaph, the second,\nfourth, eighth, tenth, twelfth and fourteenth to Jeduthun, and the rest\n(fourteen in number) to Heman.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9the fourth to Izri, his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b9\u00b2the\n fifth to Nethaniah, his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b9\u00b3the\n sixth to Bukkiah, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n\n=11.= _Izri_] See note on _Zeri_, verse 3.\n\n \u00b9\u2074the seventh to Jesharelah, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n \u00b9\u2075the eighth to Jeshaiah, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n \u00b9\u2076the ninth to Mattaniah, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n\n=14.= _Jesharelah_] Compare verse 2.\n\n \u00b9\u2077the tenth to Shimei, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n\n=17.= _Shimei_] Not mentioned in the present text of verses 2\u20124; see\nnote on _Jeshaiah_, verse 3.\n\n \u00b9\u2078the eleventh to Azarel, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n \u00b9\u2079the twelfth to Hashabiah, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n\n=18.= _Azarel_] Called _Uzziel_, verse 4.\n\n \u00b2\u2070for the thirteenth, Shubael, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n \u00b2\u00b9for the fourteenth, Mattithiah, his sons and his brethren,\n twelve:\n\n=20.= _Shubael_] Called _Shebuel_, verse 4.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2for the fifteenth to Jeremoth, his sons and his brethren,\n twelve: \u00b2\u00b3for the sixteenth to Hananiah, his sons and his\n brethren, twelve: \u00b2\u2074for the seventeenth to Joshbekashah, his\n sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b2\u2075for the eighteenth to Hanani,\n his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b2\u2076for the nineteenth to\n Mallothi, his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b2\u2077for the twentieth\n to Eliathah, his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b2\u2078for the one\n and twentieth to Hothir, his sons and his brethren, twelve:\n \u00b2\u2079for the two and twentieth to Giddalti, his sons and his\n brethren, twelve: \u00b3\u2070for the three and twentieth to Mahazioth,\n his sons and his brethren, twelve: \u00b3\u00b9for the four and twentieth\n to Romamti-ezer, his sons and his brethren, twelve.\n\n=22.= _Jeremoth_] Called _Jerimoth_, verse 4.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVI.\n\n\n =1\u201212= (compare ix. 17\u201227).\n THE COURSES OF THE DOORKEEPERS.\n\n \u00b9For the courses of the doorkeepers: of the Korahites;\n Meshelemiah\u00b9 the son of Kore, of the sons of Asaph\u00b2. \u00b2And\n Meshelemiah had sons; Zechariah the firstborn, Jediael the\n second, Zebadiah the third, Jathniel the fourth;\n\n \u00b9 In verse 14, _Shelemiah_.\n\n \u00b2 In chapter ix. 19, _Ebiasaph_.\n\n=1.= _Meshelemiah_, etc.] For the names of the doorkeepers see notes on\nix. 17 ff.\n\n_of the sons of Asaph_] For _Asaph_ read =Ebiasaph=, as in ix. 19.\n\n \u00b3Elam the fifth, Jehohanan the sixth, Eliehoenai the seventh.\n\n=3.= _Eliehoenai_] The form differs from that in iii. 23, but has the\nsame meaning, viz., \u201cMine eyes are towards Jehovah.\u201d\n\n \u2074And Obed-edom had sons; Shemaiah the firstborn, Jehozabad the\n second, Joah the third, and Sacar the fourth, and Nethanel the\n fifth;\n\n=4.= _Obed-edom_] For _Obed-edom_ see xiii. 13, note.\n\n \u2075Ammiel the sixth, Issachar the seventh, Peullethai the eighth:\n for God blessed him. \u2076Also unto Shemaiah his son were sons born,\n that ruled over the house of their father: for they were mighty\n men of valour.\n\n=5.= _for God blessed him_] \u201chim\u201d refers to \u201cObed-edom\u201d (verse 4),\nwho was blessed with eight sons. It seems likely that the phrase \u201cGod\nblessed him\u201d is intended to be a reminiscence of xiii. 14 and indicates\nthat the Levitical Obed-edom was strangely identified by tradition\nwith Obed-edom the Gittite in whose house the Ark was temporarily left\nby David (xiii. 13). For other references to Obed-edom as one of the\ndoorkeepers, see xv. 18, 24, xvi. 38. On the other hand he is classed\nas a singer in xv. 21, xvi. 5, passages which are probably additions\nto the original text of Chronicles, or at any rate represent later or\ndivergent tradition.\n\n \u2077The sons of Shemaiah; Othni, and Rephael, and Obed, Elzabad,\n whose brethren were valiant men, Elihu, and Semachiah. \u2078All\n these were of the sons of Obed-edom: they and their sons and\n their brethren, able men in strength for the service; threescore\n and two of Obed-edom.\n\n=7.= _whose brethren_] The pronoun refers to Elzabad.\n\n \u2079And Meshelemiah had sons and brethren, valiant men, eighteen.\n\n=9.= _Meshelemiah_] Compare verses 1\u20123 to which verse 9 is a supplement.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Also Hosah, of the children of Merari, had sons; Shimri the\n chief, (for though he was not the firstborn, yet his father made\n him chief;) \u00b9\u00b9Hilkiah the second, Tebaliah the third, Zechariah\n the fourth: all the sons and brethren of Hosah were thirteen.\n\n=10.= _Hosah_] He is mentioned as a doorkeeper along with Obed-edom in\nxvi. 38.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Of these were the courses of the doorkeepers, even of the\n chief men, having charges\u00b9 like as their brethren, to minister\n in the house of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _wards over against their brethren_.\n\n=12.= _Of these ... even of the chief men_] In verses 8, 9, 11 taken\ntogether ninety-three doorkeepers are enumerated, who are presumably\nthe heads of the four thousand mentioned in xxiii. 5. In ix. 22 again\nthe total number (as it seems) of doorkeepers is given as two hundred\nand twelve. The discrepancy may be due to the Chronicler having\nused different documents belonging to different dates: for other\npossibilities see note on ix. 22.\n\n\n =13\u201219= (compare ix. 23\u201226).\n THE STATIONS OF THE DOORKEEPERS.\n\nRemark how na\u00efvely the Chronicler names various parts of the Temple as\nif it had been already in existence at this time.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And they cast lots, as well the small as the great, according\n to their fathers\u2019 houses, for every gate. \u00b9\u2074And the lot eastward\n fell to Shelemiah\u00b9. Then for Zechariah his son, a discreet\n counsellor, they cast lots; and his lot came out northward. \u00b9\u2075To\n Obed-edom southward; and to his sons the storehouse.\n\n \u00b9 In verse 1, _Meshelemiah_.\n\n=14.= _Shelemiah_] i.e. Meshelemiah, verses 1, 2.\n\n \u00b9\u2076To Shuppim and Hosah westward, by the gate of Shallecheth\u00b9, at\n the causeway that goeth up, ward against ward. \u00b9\u2077Eastward were\n six Levites, northward four a day, southward four a day, and for\n the storehouse two and two.\n\n \u00b9 That is, _Casting forth_.\n\n=16.= _To Shuppim and Hosah_] Read, =To Hosah=. The word \u201cShuppim\u201d\nshould be omitted from the text. It is merely an accidental repetition\n(in a corrupt form) of the last word in verse 15, namely \u201cAsuppim,\u201d\nrendered _storehouse_.\n\n_by the gate of Shallecheth_] There is no other mention in the Bible\nof a gate \u201cShallecheth,\u201d but it is perhaps to be identified with \u201cthe\nentering in of the house of the LORD ... which was in the precincts\u201d\n(\u201cParv\u0101rim\u201d _Hebrew_) mentioned 2 Kings xxiii. 11; compare note on\nverse 18. Possibly the text should be corrected and we should read,\nfollowing the LXX., \u201cby the gate of the chamber.\u201d\n\n_at the causeway that goeth up_] \u201cThe causeway\u201d led up to the Temple\n_either_ from Ophel (on the south) _or_ from the Western City (across\nthe Tyrop\u0153on Valley). Traces of two causeways have been discovered by\nexcavation, viz., \u201cWilson\u2019s Arch\u201d (B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 65) and\n\u201cRobinson\u2019s Arch\u201d (_Palestine_\u2075 p. 66). The second of these arches\nprobably marks the site of a causeway belonging to the period of the\nKings.\n\n \u00b9\u2078For Parbar\u00b9 westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar\u00b9.\n \u00b9\u2079These were the courses of the doorkeepers; of the sons of the\n Korahites, and of the sons of Merari.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the Precinct_.\n\n=18.= _Parbar_] This word, apparently the same as _parvarim_, 2 Kings\nxxiii. 11 (Revised Version \u201cprecincts\u201d; compare margin here), seems to\ndenote some building built on the Temple area on the west side. It may\nhave been a colonnade. The word is Persian and means \u201clighted [by the\nsun].\u201d\n\n\n =20\u201232.=\n VARIOUS OFFICERS.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And of the Levites\u00b9, Ahijah was over the treasuries of the\n house of God, and over the treasuries of the dedicated\u00b2 things.\n\n \u00b9 According to the Septuagint, _And the Levites their brethren\n were over &c._\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _holy things_.\n\n=20.= _And of the Levites, Ahijah was over_] Read (with LXX.; compare\nmargin), =And the Levites their brethren were over=. The confusion of\nreadings is easy in Hebrew; compare ii. 25 for a similar case.\n\n_the dedicated things_] Compare verses 26\u201228.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9The sons of Ladan\u00b9; the sons of the Gershonites belonging to\n Ladan, the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ belonging to Ladan the\n Gershonite; Jehieli\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter vi. 17, _Libni_.\n\n \u00b2 In chapter xxiii. 8, _Jehiel_.\n\n=21.= _Ladan_] compare xxiii. 7; called Libni in vi. 17 [2, Hebrew].\n\n_Jehieli_] Read =Jehiel= as in xxiii. 8, xxix. 8; and probably delete\nthe following \u201c_The sons of Jehieli_,\u201d compare xxiii. 8.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2The sons of Jehieli; Zetham, and Joel his brother, over the\n treasuries of the house of the LORD.\n\n=22.= _Zetham, and Joel_] These appear as brethren of Jehiel in xxiii.\n8; but since families, not individuals, are spoken of, the discrepancy\nis not important.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Of the Amramites, of the Izharites, of the Hebronites, of the\n Uzzielites:\n\n=23.= _the Amramites_, etc.] Compare xxiii. 12.\n\n \u00b2\u2074and Shebuel the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, was ruler\n over the treasuries.\n\n=24.= _Shebuel_] rather Shubael, as in xxiv. 20; compare xxiii. 16.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And his brethren; of Eliezer _came_ Rehabiah his son, and\n Jeshaiah his son, and Joram his son, and Zichri his son, and\n Shelomoth his son.\n\n=25.= _of Eliezer came Rehabiah_] Compare xxiii. 15\u201217, xxiv. 21.\n\n_Shelomoth_] (so _Keth\u012bb_); Authorized Version _Shelomith_ follows\n_\u1e32er\u012b_; compare verse 28 (margin).\n\n \u00b2\u2076This Shelomoth and his brethren were over all the treasuries\n of the dedicated things, which David the king, and the heads of\n the fathers\u2019 _houses_, the captains over thousands and hundreds,\n and the captains of the host, had dedicated. \u00b2\u2077Out of the spoil\u00b9\n won in battles did they dedicate to repair the house of the LORD.\n \u00b2\u2078And all that Samuel the seer, and Saul the son of Kish, and\n Abner the son of Ner, and Joab the son of Zeruiah, had dedicated;\n whosoever had dedicated any thing, it was under the hand of\n Shelomoth\u00b2, and of his brethren.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Out of the battles and the spoil_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Shelomith_.\n\n=26.= _David the king_] Compare xviii. 11.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Of the Izharites, Chenaniah and his sons were for the outward\n business over Israel, for officers and judges.\n\n=29.= _Izharites_] Compare xxiii. 12.\n\n_the outward business_] This business is here expressly defined as work\n\u201cfor officers and judges,\u201d as compared with the duties of maintaining\nthe worship of the Temple and the construction or repair of the fabric\n(compare xxiii. 4; 2 Chronicles xix. 11; Nehemiah xi. 16).\n\n \u00b3\u2070Of the Hebronites, Hashabiah and his brethren, men of valour,\n a thousand and seven hundred, had the oversight of Israel beyond\n Jordan westward; for all the business of the LORD, and for the\n service of the king.\n\n=30.= _the Hebronites_] Compare xxiii. 12.\n\n_had the oversight of Israel_] How their duties were related to those\nof Chenaniah and his sons (verse 29) is not made clear.\n\n_beyond Jordan westward_] Compare Joshua xxii. 7, Revised Version\nWestern Palestine is meant.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Of the Hebronites was Jerijah the chief, even of the\n Hebronites, according to their generations by fathers\u2019 _houses_.\n In the fortieth year of the reign of David they were sought for,\n and there were found among them mighty men of valour at Jazer of\n Gilead.\n\n=31.= _Jerijah_] called _Jeriah_ (Hebrew _Jerijahu_) in xxiii. 19.\n\n_at Jazer_] compare vi. 81 (vi. 66, Hebrew); Numbers xxi. 32, Revised\nVersion The Eastern Hebronites were given office east of Jordan;\ncompare verse 32.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And his brethren, men of valour, were two thousand and seven\n hundred, heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_, whom king David made\n overseers over the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half\n tribe of the Manassites, for every matter pertaining to God, and\n for the affairs of the king.\n\n=32.= _his brethren_] i.e. the brethren of Jerijah. It is remarkable\nthat their number should be given as 2700 for the two and a half tribes,\nwhereas the overseers for the nine and a half tribes west of Jordan are\nsaid to number only 1700. Curtis sees in this a hint of the importance\nof Gilead in the Chronicler\u2019s period (compare 1 Maccabees v. 45).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVII.\n THE ORGANISATION OF THE MILITARY AND CIVIL OFFICIALS.\n\n\n =1\u201215.=\n THE DIVISIONS OF THE ARMY BY COURSES.\n\nIt is in keeping with the plan and spirit of the Chronicler that\nhe should not fail to ascribe to David, who for all his piety was\npreeminently the warrior-king, the organisation on an immense scale\nof the military and civil forces of the land. In monthly \u201ccourses\u201d the\nking is here said to be attended by officers and soldiers totalling 288,\n000 men! The enumeration of David\u2019s \u201cmighty men\u201d in chapter xi. 10 ff.\nis an utterly insufficient reason for supposing that the present\nchapter cannot also come from the Chronicler. It is suitable to his\nnarrative, characteristic of his style, and, if further evidence be\nneeded, it may be found in the tone of the references to the civil and\nmilitary authorities in xxii. 17; xxiii. 2; xxviii. 1 ff., 21; xxix.\n6 ff.\n\n \u00b9Now the children of Israel after their number, _to wit_,\n the heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ and the captains of thousands\n and of hundreds, and their officers that served the king, in any\n matter of the courses which came in and went out month by month\n throughout all the months of the year, of every course were\n twenty and four thousand.\n\n=1.= _came in and went out_] Came on duty and went off duty; compare 2\nChronicles xxiii. 8.\n\n \u00b2Over the first course for the first month was Jashobeam the son\n of Zabdiel: and in his course were twenty and four thousand.\n\n=2.= _Jashobeam_] Compare xi. 11, note.\n\n \u00b3_He was_ of the children of Perez, the chief of all the\n captains of the host for the first month.\n\n=3.= _Perez_] For Perez, see ii. 4, 5.\n\n \u2074And over the course of the second month was Dodai the Ahohite,\n and his course; and Mikloth the ruler: and in his course were\n twenty and four thousand.\n\n=4.= _Dodai the Ahohite_] Read probably (compare xi. 12), \u201cEleazar the\nson of Dodo, the Ahohite.\u201d\n\n_and his course; and Mikloth the ruler_] The words are corrupt and are\nomitted in the LXX. The original text is quite uncertain. A Benjamite\ncalled Mikloth is mentioned in viii. 32.\n\n \u2075The third captain of the host for the third month was Benaiah,\n the son of Jehoiada the priest\u00b9, chief: and in his course were\n twenty and four thousand.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _chief minister_ See 2 Samuel viii. 18.\n\n=5.= _Benaiah_] Compare xi. 22 ff., xviii. 17.\n\n_Jehoiada the priest, chief_] \u201cchief\u201d refers to Benaiah.\n\n \u2076This is that Benaiah, who was the mighty man of the thirty, and\n over the thirty: and _of_ his course was Ammizabad his son.\n\n=6.= _the mighty man of the thirty, and over the thirty_] Compare\nxi. 25.\n\n \u2077The fourth _captain_ for the fourth month was Asahel the\n brother of Joab, and Zebadiah his son after him: and in his\n course were twenty and four thousand.\n\n=7.= _Asahel_] compare xi. 26, note.\n\n \u2078The fifth captain for the fifth month was Shamhuth the Izrahite:\n and in his course were twenty and four thousand.\n\n=8.= _Shamhuth the Izrahite_] Perhaps to be identified with \u201cShammoth\nthe Harorite\u201d of xi. 27; see note there.\n\n \u2079The sixth _captain_ for the sixth month was Ira the son of\n Ikkesh the Tekoite: and in his course were twenty and four\n thousand.\n\n=9.= _Ira_] compare xi. 28.\n\n \u00b9\u2070The seventh _captain_ for the seventh month was Helez the\n Pelonite, of the children of Ephraim: and in his course were\n twenty and four thousand.\n\n=10.= _Helez the Pelonite_] Compare xi. 27, note.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9The eighth _captain_ for the eighth month was Sibbecai the\n Hushathite, of the Zerahites: and in his course were twenty and\n four thousand.\n\n=11.= _Sibbecai the Hushathite_] Compare xi. 29, notes.\n\n_Zerahites_] (also verse 13). Descendants of Zerah, son of Judah; ii. 4.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2The ninth _captain_ for the ninth month was Abiezer the\n Anathothite, of the Benjamites: and in his course were twenty\n and four thousand.\n\n=12.= _Abiezer the Anathothite_] Compare xi. 28.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3The tenth _captain_ for the tenth month was Maharai the\n Netophathite, of the Zerahites: and in his course were twenty\n and four thousand.\n\n=13.= _Maharai the Netophathite_] Compare xi. 30.\n\n \u00b9\u2074The eleventh _captain_ for the eleventh month was Benaiah the\n Pirathonite, of the children of Ephraim: and in his course were\n twenty and four thousand.\n\n=14.= _Benaiah the Pirathonite_] Compare xi. 31.\n\n \u00b9\u2075The twelfth _captain_ for the twelfth month was Heldai\u00b9 the\n Netophathite, of Othniel: and in his course were twenty and four\n thousand.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xi. 30, _Heled_.\n\n=15.= _Heldai_] Called _Heled_ in xi. 30.\n\n_of Othniel_] compare Judges i. 13, iii. 9. Thus Heldai was not of pure\nIsraelite descent, but belonged to the Kenizzites (Kenaz), a younger\nbranch of the Calebites, an independent tribe which settled primarily\nin southern Judah and was later incorporated in the tribe of Judah.\nGenealogically this fact was expressed by calling Caleb a son of\nHezron, the son of Judah. See the article _Caleb_ in _Encyclopedia\nBritannica_\u00b9\u00b9.\n\n\n =16\u201224.=\n THE PRINCES OF THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL.\n\nSix tribes which were accounted \u201csons\u201d of Leah are given first, then\nsix \u201csons,\u201d actual or legal, of Rachel; whilst Zadok as chief of the\npriestly caste may be reckoned as standing in a category by himself,\nrepresentative of the nation as a whole. Gad and Asher are omitted, for\nsome reason not easy to discern, perhaps accidentally or because the\ntraditional number of \u201ctwelve\u201d tribes was complete in this list without\nthem.\n\n \u00b9\u2076Furthermore over the tribes of Israel: of the Reubenites was\n Eliezer the son of Zichri the ruler: of the Simeonites,\n Shephatiah the son of Maacah: \u00b9\u2077of Levi, Hashabiah the son of\n Kemuel: of Aaron, Zadok:\n\n=17.= _Hashabiah_] Perhaps the person mentioned in xxvi. 30. The name\nis common among Levites.\n\n_of Aaron, Zadok_] compare xii. 27, 28.\n\n \u00b9\u2078of Judah, Elihu\u00b9, one of the brethren of David: of Issachar,\n Omri the son of Michael: \u00b9\u2079of Zebulun, Ishmaiah the son of\n Obadiah: of Naphtali, Jeremoth the son of Azriel: \u00b2\u2070of the\n children of Ephraim, Hoshea the son of Azaziah: of the half\n tribe of Manasseh, Joel the son of Pedaiah:\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Samuel xvi. 6, _Eliab_.\n\n=18.= _Elihu_] Perhaps the \u201cEliab\u201d of 1 Samuel xvi. 6; compare margin.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9of the half _tribe_ of Manasseh in Gilead, Iddo the son of\n Zechariah: of Benjamin, Jaasiel the son of Abner: \u00b2\u00b2of Dan,\n Azarel the son of Jeroham. These were the captains of the tribes\n of Israel.\n\n=21.= _Gilead_] \u201cGilead\u201d is strictly speaking the name of the district\nbetween the Jabbok and Moab, in which the tribes of Gad and Reuben\ndwelt. Here it is used less precisely to include Bashan, the district\nnorth-east of Jordan in which the half tribe of Manasseh lived: compare\nii. 22, note.\n\n_Iddo_] Spelt quite differently in Hebrew from the name of the father\nof the prophet Zechariah (Zechariah i. 1).\n\n_Abner_] 1 Samuel xiv. 50, 51.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3But David took not the number of them from twenty years old\n and under: because the LORD had said he would increase Israel\n like to the stars of heaven.\n\n=23.= _took not the number_] In Numbers i. 3 ff. it is said that in the\ncensus which God commanded Moses to take in the wilderness only those\nabove twenty years old were to be numbered, and a chief from each tribe\nwas appointed to assist Moses in the task of numeration. The Chronicler\nin this section wishes to say that, though David erred in taking the\ncensus unbidden by Jehovah, he at least conformed to the principles\nof the Law in carrying out his project: those under 20 years of age\nwere not counted, and the princes just enumerated may be supposed to\ncorrespond to the chiefs who assisted Moses.\n\n \u00b2\u2074Joab the son of Zeruiah began to number, but finished not; and\n there came wrath for this upon Israel; neither was the number\n put into the account in the chronicles of king David.\n\n=24.= _but finished not_] Compare xxi. 6.\n\n_into the account in_] A summary of the numbers of David\u2019s census is\ngiven in xxi. 5 and also (with divergences) in 2 Samuel xxiv. 9. The\nChronicler probably means in the present passage that the details of\nthe census were not entered in the official records.\n\n_the chronicles_] Literally _the acts of the days_; compare\nIntroduction, \u00a7\u00a05.\n\n\n =25\u201231.=\n VARIOUS OFFICERS OF THE KING.\n\nTwelve different officers are named here who acted as stewards of king\nDavid\u2019s property.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And over the king\u2019s treasuries was Azmaveth the son of Adiel:\n and over the treasuries in the fields, in the cities, and in the\n villages, and in the castles, was Jonathan the son of Uzziah:\n \u00b2\u2076and over them that did the work of the field for tillage of\n the ground was Ezri the son of Chelub:\n\n=25.= _castles_] Literally _towers_; compare 2 Chronicles xxvi. 10,\nxxvii. 4.\n\n \u00b2\u2077and over the vineyards was Shimei the Ramathite: and over the\n increase of the vineyards for the wine cellars was Zabdi the\n Shiphmite:\n\n=27.= _the Ramathite_] The well-known Ramah was in Benjamin, but there\nwas also a Ramah (or Ramoth) of the South (Joshua xix. 8; 1 Samuel xxx.\n27) from which the epithet \u201cRamathite\u201d might be derived.\n\n_the Shiphmite_] The adjective is probably derived from \u201cSiphmoth\u201d (1\nSamuel xxx. 28), the name of a place in the south of Judah. If so, we\nshould read either \u201cSiphmite\u201d here, or \u201cShiphmoth\u201d in 1 Samuel.\n\n \u00b2\u2078and over the olive trees and the sycomore trees that were in\n the lowland was Baal-hanan the Gederite: and over the cellars of\n oil was Joash:\n\n=28.= _sycomore_] The fig-mulberry, a tree having leaves like\nmulberry-leaves, and bearing a fruit resembling figs. Compare\n2 Chronicles i. 15; Amos, vii. 14.\n\n_in the lowland_] Hebrew _Shephelah_. See note on 2 Chronicles i. 15\n(\u201cvale\u201d).\n\n_Gederite_] i.e. inhabitant of \u201cGeder\u201d (Joshua xii. 13), perhaps\nanother form of \u201cGederah\u201d (Joshua xv. 36). A place in the south of\nJudah is intended in any case. See note on xii. 4.\n\n \u00b2\u2079and over the herds that fed in Sharon was Shitrai the\n Sharonite: and over the herds that were in the valleys was\n Shaphat the son of Adlai:\n\n=29.= _Sharon_] The great maritime plain bounded on the east by the\n\u201clowland\u201d (Shephelah). \u201cThe valleys\u201d would probably be the depressions\namong the hills of the Shephelah which open out into Sharon; compare\nCanticles ii. 1.\n\n \u00b3\u2070and over the camels was Obil the Ishmaelite: and over the\n asses was Jehdeiah the Meronothite:\n\n=30.= _Obil_] The name is a form of the Arabic word _\u0101bil_, \u201cone who\nfeeds camels.\u201d\n\n_the Meronothite_] _Meronoth_ was perhaps near Gibeon and Mizpah;\ncompare Nehemiah iii. 7.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9and over the flocks was Jaziz the Hagrite. All these were the\n rulers of the substance which was king David\u2019s.\n\n=31.= _Hagrite_] Compare v. 10.\n\n\n =32\u201234= (compare xviii. 15\u201217 = 2 Samuel viii. 16\u201218;\n compare 2 Samuel xx. 23\u201226).\n DAVID\u2019S OFFICERS AT COURT.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2Also Jonathan David\u2019s uncle\u00b9 was a counsellor, a man of\n understanding, and a scribe: and Jehiel the son of Hachmoni was\n with the king\u2019s sons:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _brother\u2019s son_.\n\n=32.= _Jonathan David\u2019s uncle_] The name Jonathan is common in Hebrew,\nbut no uncle of David is elsewhere mentioned. A \u201cJonathan, son of\nShimea,\u201d David\u2019s brother, is referred to in xx. 7 (= 2 Samuel xxi. 21),\nand many scholars in consequence prefer to follow the margin and render\n=Jonathan, David\u2019s brother\u2019s son=. Curtis renders =David\u2019s lover=,\ntaking the reference to be to Jonathan, Saul\u2019s son, who as the friend\nof David\u2019s youth might be spoken of as his first \u201ccounsellor.\u201d This\nview seems improbable but is not impossible, despite the phrase \u201c_and a\nscribe_\u201d which could not possibly be said of Saul\u2019s warrior son. There\nis some evidence that those words are a gloss, and it is true that\nthe list is not one of living men only (compare Ahithophel), whilst\nfinally the Chronicler might well be tempted to drag in an allusion to\na relationship so well-known and so creditable to David.\n\n_a scribe_] Not the chief scribe; compare xviii. 16, note.\n\n_with the king\u2019s sons_] As tutor; compare 2 Kings x. 6.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3and Ahithophel was the king\u2019s counsellor: and Hushai the\n Archite was the king\u2019s friend:\n\n=33.= _Ahithophel_] See 2 Samuel xv. 31; xvi. 20\u2012xvii. 23.\n\n_Hushai_] See 2 Samuel xv. 32\u201237, xvi. 16\u201219, xvii. 5\u201216.\n\n_Archite_] The \u201cborder of the Archites\u201d was near Bethel (Joshua xvi. 2).\nThe word has no connection with the \u201cArkite\u201d of i. 15.\n\n_king\u2019s friend_] compare 2 Samuel xvi. 16. \u201cSpecial titles served to\nsignify the degree of rank the great men held with respect to the king\n[of Egypt]. In old times the most important were _the friend_ and _the\nwell-beloved friend_ of the king\u201d (Erman, _Ancient Egypt_, English\ntranslation p. 72). The Greek kings of Syria granted similar titles\nto their chief dependents; compare 1 Maccabees ii. 18 (Revised Version\nwith margin), \u201cthou and thy house shall be in the number of the king\u2019s\nFriends.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u2074and after Ahithophel was Jehoiada the son of Benaiah, and\n Abiathar: and the captain of the king\u2019s host was Joab.\n\n=34.= _after Ahithophel_] Compare verse 33.\n\n_Jehoiada the son of Benaiah_] Either we must read, \u201cBenaiah the son of\nJehoiada\u201d (compare xviii. 17), or we must assume that a person known\nonly from this passage is meant.\n\n_and Abiathar_] Possibly such a phrase as \u201cAnd Zadok and Abiathar were\npriests\u201d (compare 2 Samuel xx. 25) originally stood here.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS XXVIII, XXIX.\n DAVID\u2019S FAREWELL SPEECH.\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n\n =1\u20128= (compare xxii. 17\u201219).\n HIS CHARGE TO THE CHIEF MEN OF ISRAEL CONCERNING\n THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE.\n\nThe glorious reign now reaches a fitting climax. David summons the\nassembly of all the princes and commanders of Israel, and, in the\npresence of the heir to the throne, addresses them in a final oration.\nHe recounts his Divine election and rule over Israel and the promise\nthat the same Divine Power will be with Solomon his son (xxviii. 1\u201210).\nThen, handing over to Solomon the inspired plans for the Temple (11\u201221),\nand briefly describing the treasures he has amassed for its enrichment\n(xxix. 1\u20125) he appeals to the liberality of the people and is met by a\nmagnificent response (6\u20129). Finally, in a prayer of fine humility and\nfaith (10\u201220), he commends his son and his people to the eternal and\nall-powerful God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. How immense the\ncontrast between this and the pathetically real picture of the closing\ndays of David portrayed in 1 Kings i., ii. 1\u201211! There the dying\nmonarch is seen, exhausted in mind and body, surrounded by the\nintrigues of an Eastern palace. With a last flicker of his strength, he\nrouses himself to secure the succession of Solomon by firm but ruthless\norders against the leaders of the opposing faction. Whilst the\nnarrative in Kings is indispensable to us in preserving some record of\nthe actual history of the last days of David, Chronicles is also of\ngreat value in its own way as a religious interpretation of history\n(Introduction pp. liii, lv). Rightly understood, this farewell speech\nis in many respects a noble and inspiring passage of Scripture: so\n_ought_ a perfect reign to end. Here David dies, leaving his country\npeaceful, powerful, and contented. He dies believing that his people\u2019s\ntrue prosperity is in its zeal for the worship of God; and for that end,\nwith the popular approval, he has made marvellous preparation. And\nlastly he dies, in no vain-glorious spirit, but conscious of the\nlittleness of man and the majesty of God, and in humble dependence on\nthe continuance of Grace.\n\n \u00b9And David assembled all the princes of Israel, the princes\n of the tribes, and the captains of the companies that served\n the king by course, and the captains of thousands, and the\n captains of hundreds, and the rulers over all the substance and\n possessions\u00b9 of the king and of his sons, with the officers\u00b2,\n and the mighty men, even all the mighty men of valour, unto\n Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _cattle_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _eunuchs_.\n\n=1.= _the princes of the tribes_] Compare xxvii. 16\u201222.\n\n_the captains of the companies_] See xxvii. 1\u201215.\n\n_the rulers_] See xxvii. 25\u201231.\n\n_officers_] margin _eunuchs_; the earlier authorities however for\nDavid\u2019s reign (in the books of Samuel) do not mention such persons; and\nthey were perhaps introduced into the Israelite court at a later time.\nYet compare 1 Samuel viii. 15.\n\n \u00b2Then David the king stood up upon his feet, and said, Hear me,\n my brethren, and my people: as for me, it was in mine heart to\n build an house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the LORD,\n and for the footstool of our God; and I had made ready for the\n building.\n\n=2.= _stood up upon his feet_] Kings sometimes made orations sitting;\ncompare Acts xii. 21. Here the king stands to mark the greatness of the\noccasion.\n\n_my brethren_] The king is the _brother_ of his subjects; Deuteronomy\nxvii. 15, 20; compare Psalms xlv. 7.\n\n_it was in mine heart_] See xvii. 1; 2 Samuel vii. 2.\n\n_an house of rest_] Compare xvii. 5; 2 Samuel vii. 6.\n\n_the footstool_] compare Isaiah lx. 13.\n\n \u00b3But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build an house for my name,\n because thou art a man of war, and hast shed blood.\n\n=3.= _thou art a man of war_] See note on xxii. 8.\n\n \u2074Howbeit the LORD, the God of Israel, chose me out of all the\n house of my father to be king over Israel for ever: for he hath\n chosen Judah to be prince\u00b9; and in the house of Judah, the house\n of my father; and among the sons of my father he took pleasure\n in me to make me king over all Israel:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _leader_.\n\n=4.= _out of all the house_] See 1 Samuel xvi. 1\u201213.\n\n_king ... for ever_] i.e. the kingdom is to abide with David and his\ndescendants. That the promise, however, was not to be interpreted as\nindependent of moral conditions, see below verse 9 _ad fin._\n\n \u2075and of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he\n hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom\n of the LORD over Israel.\n\n=5.= _many sons_] compare iii. 1\u20129.\n\n_he hath chosen Solomon_] The earlier histories (_Samuel\u2012Kings_) do not\nthus speak of God choosing Solomon as David\u2019s successor; but compare\n2 Samuel xii. 24, 25; 1 Kings i. 11\u201214.\n\n_the throne of the kingdom of the LORD_] Compare xxix. 23, _the throne\nof the LORD_. The Chronicler regards the king as the deputy of Jehovah.\n\n \u2076And he said unto me, Solomon thy son, he shall build my house\n and my courts: for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be\n his father.\n\n=6.= _he shall build my house_] Compare xxii. 10.\n\n \u2077And I will establish his kingdom for ever, if he be constant to\n do my commandments and my judgements, as at this day.\n\n=7.= _And I will establish_] Compare xvii. 11.\n\n_if he be constant_] Literally _if he be strong_; compare verses 10, 20,\n_be strong_ (same word in Hebrew). Compare 1 Kings ix. 4, 5.\n\n \u2078Now therefore, in the sight of all Israel, the congregation of\n the LORD, and in the audience of our God, observe and seek out\n all the commandments of the LORD your God: that ye may possess\n this good land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children\n after you for ever.\n\n=8.= _and seek out_] The same Hebrew word is used in xiii. 3, _we\nsought not unto it_ (i.e. the Ark) _in the days of Saul_.\n\n_that ye may possess this good land_] _possess_ = _inherit_. The Hebrew\nword connotes _three_ different ideas, which may all have been present\nto the mind of the speaker, viz. (1)\u00a0continued holding of the land by\npassing it from father to son (compare Exodus xx. 12), (2) completion\nof the work of conquest left unfinished by Joshua (compare Genesis xxiv.\n60), (3)\u00a0enjoyment of the fruits of the land (compare Psalms xxv. 13).\n\n\n =9\u201221.=\n DAVID\u2019S CHARGE TO SOLOMON.\n\n \u2079And thou, Solomon my son, know thou the God of thy father,\n and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind:\n for the LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the\n imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found\n of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.\n\n=9.= _know thou the God of thy father_] For this use of _know_ compare\nExodus v. 2; Isaiah i. 3; Jeremiah xxxi. 34.\n\n_with a perfect heart_] i.e. with a _single, undivided heart_; compare\nxii. 33 \u201cthey were not of double heart.\u201d In 2 Chronicles xv. 17 the\nheart of king Asa is described as _perfect_, because he took no part\nin the idolatrous practices which prevailed in his day. Faithfulness\nto Jehovah, not moral perfection, is implied in phrases of this kind.\n\n_the LORD searcheth_] Compare Ezekiel\u2019s vision of the Lord\u2019s detection\nof secret idolatry (Ezekiel viii.).\n\n \u00b9\u2070Take heed now; for the LORD hath chosen thee to build an house\n for the sanctuary: be strong, and do it.\n\n=10.= _hath chosen thee_] See on verse 5.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Then David gave to Solomon his son the pattern of the\n porch _of the temple_, and of the houses thereof, and of the\n treasuries thereof, and of the upper rooms thereof, and of the\n inner chambers thereof, and of the place\u00b9 of the mercy-seat:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _house_.\n\n=11.= _the pattern_] Compare verse 12; Exodus xxv. 9. The Temple, like\nthe tabernacle, was to be constructed according to a pattern or model\ncommunicated by inspiration (see verse 19). A verbal description rather\nthan a drawing is meant.\n\n_the porch_] compare 2 Chronicles iii. 4; 1 Kings vi. 3.\n\n_the houses thereof_] Compare 2 Chronicles xxxiv. 11. \u201cThereof\u201d\nof course refers to the Temple as a whole, and by \u201chouses\u201d we must\nunderstand the various portions of the building.\n\n_the treasuries_] A different Hebrew word from that used in verse 12.\nThe inner treasuries mentioned here were for treasure; the outer\ntreasuries (verse 11) were perhaps rather store-chambers.\n\n_upper rooms_] compare 2 Chronicles iii. 9; and 1 Kings vi. 6 (where\nhowever the Hebrew word is different).\n\n_the place of the mercy-seat_] The Holy of Holies.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2and the pattern of all that he had by\u00b9 the spirit, for the\n courts of the house of the LORD, and for all the chambers round\n about, for the treasuries of the house of God, and for the\n treasuries of the dedicated things:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in his spirit_.\n\n=12.= _that he had by the spirit_] i.e. that had come to him by\nrevelation and rested with him waiting for realisation. Margin, _that\nhe had in his spirit_ (i.e. in his mind) is a less likely translation.\n\n_for the courts_] The last verse dealt with the Temple itself; this one\nwith the courts and detached buildings.\n\n_chambers_] compare ix. 26, note.\n\n_the treasuries_] The same Hebrew word as in xxvi. 20; Nehemiah xiii.\n12, 15. See note on verse 11.\n\n_dedicated things_] xxvi. 26\u201228; 2 Chronicles xv. 18.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3also for the courses of the priests and the Levites, and for\n all the work of the service of the house of the LORD, and for\n all the vessels of service in the house of the LORD:\n\n=13.= _also for the courses_] The verse is best taken in adjectival\nconnection with the phrase _the chambers round about_ in the preceding\nverse: these were used _for the treasuries..._, and \u201c_also for the\ncourses_,\u201d etc. It is possible, however, to take it in the sense\n\u201che gave the pattern also for the courses,\u201d etc.; i.e. the scheme of\nrotation set forth in previous chapters.\n\n_of the priests and the Levites_] Compare xxiv. 1\u201231.\n\n \u00b9\u2074of gold by weight for the _vessels of_ gold, for all vessels\n of every kind of service; _of silver_ for all the vessels of\n silver by weight, for all vessels of every kind of service:\n \u00b9\u2075by weight also for the candlesticks of gold, and for the lamps\n thereof, of gold, by weight for every candlestick and for the\n lamps thereof: and for the candlesticks of silver, _silver_\n by weight for _every_ candlestick and for the lamps thereof,\n according to the use of every candlestick:\n\n=14.= _of gold by weight_] _sc._ he gave the pattern or account _of\ngold_, etc.\n\n \u00b9\u2076and the gold by weight for the tables of shewbread, for every\n table; and silver for the tables of silver:\n\n=16.= _tables of shewbread_] Elsewhere, except 2 Chronicles iv. 19\n(see note on 2 Chronicles iv. 8), only one table for the shewbread is\nmentioned; compare 2 Chronicles xxix. 18; Exodus xxxv. 13, xxxvii. 10,\nxl. 22.\n\n_and silver_] Neither the silver tables of this verse, nor the silver\ncandlesticks of verse 15 are mentioned elsewhere; perhaps they stood in\nsome of the chambers (verse 12) of the Temple courts for the use of the\nLevites in their work.\n\n \u00b9\u2077and the fleshhooks, and the basons, and the cups, of pure gold:\n and for the golden bowls by weight for every bowl; and for the\n silver bowls by weight for every bowl:\n\n=17.= _fleshhooks_] Exodus xxvii. 3; 1 Samuel ii. 13.\n\n_basons_] These were used for dashing the blood of a victim against the\naltar. Compare 2 Chronicles xxix. 22.\n\n_the cups_] Probably the same as the _flagons_ (Revised Version) of\nExodus xxv. 29 which were used for pouring out the drink offering.\n\n \u00b9\u2078and for the altar of incense refined gold by weight; and gold\n for the pattern of the chariot, _even_ the cherubim, that spread\n out _their wings_, and covered the ark of the covenant of the\n LORD.\n\n=18.= _the altar of incense_] 2 Chronicles xxvi. 16; Exodus xxx. 1\u201210.\n\n_the chariot_, even _the cherubim_] Compare Ezekiel i. 5\u201210, 15\u201217.\nThe Cherubim were poetically conceived as the chariot of Jehovah. The\nphrase has its origin in the language of Psalms xviii. 10.\n\n \u00b9\u2079All this, _said David_, have I been made to understand in\n writing\u00b9 from the hand of the LORD, even all the works of this\n pattern.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the LORD made me understand in writing by his hand upon\n me, even &c._\n\n=19.= _All this_, said David, _have I been made to understand in\nwriting from the hand of the LORD, even all the works of this pattern_]\nCompare verse 11, note. As in the case of Moses and the tabernacle\n(Exodus xxv. 9, 40), so David\u2019s plans for the Temple are said to be of\nDivine origin.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And David said to Solomon his son, Be strong and of good\n courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God,\n even my God, is with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake\n thee, until all the work for the service of the house of the\n LORD be finished.\n\n=20.= _Be strong_] God\u2019s help in the planning is a pledge of God\u2019s help\nin the accomplishment. Compare verse 10, which finds its continuation\nat this point. The work was great, and Solomon young; xxii. 5.\n\n_be finished_] The LXX. shows that a passage which was present in the\nHebrew text of the second century has been later accidentally omitted\nfrom the Hebrew at this point. Add therefore =Now behold the pattern\nof the porch= _of the temple_ =and of the houses thereof, and of the\ntreasuries thereof, and of the upper rooms thereof, and of the inner\nchambers thereof, and of the house of the mercy-seat, even the pattern\nof the house of the Lord=. Torrey, _Ezra Studies_, pp. 73, 87.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And, behold, there are the courses of the priests and the\n Levites, for all the service of the house of God: and there\n shall be with thee in all manner of work every willing man that\n hath skill, for any manner of service: also the captains and all\n the people will be wholly at thy commandment.\n\n=21.= _every willing man that hath skill_] Compare Exodus xxxv. 5,\n10 ff.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIX.\n\n\n =1\u20125.=\n DAVID\u2019S CHALLENGE TO LIBERALITY.\n\n \u00b9And David the king said unto all the congregation, Solomon\n my son, whom alone God hath chosen, is yet young and tender, and\n the work is great: for the palace is not for man, but for the\n LORD God.\n\n=1.= _congregation_] or, _assembly_; the Hebrew word is cognate to the\nverb translated _assembled_ in xxviii. 1.\n\n_whom alone God hath chosen_] Compare xxviii. 5.\n\n_the palace_] Hebrew _b\u012br\u0101h_, a late word in Hebrew, perhaps derived\nfrom Assyrian _b\u012brtu_. Ordinarily it denoted a palace or fortress\n(compare Nehemiah i. 1; Esther i. 2), and is applied to the Temple\nonly here and verse 19. In Nehemiah ii. 8 (compare Ryle _in loco_) the\nbuilding which afterwards became the Tower of Antonia (\u1f21 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae,\n_the castle_, Acts xxi. 37, xxii. 24) which overlooked the Temple\nis called _the castle_ (b\u012br\u0101h) _which appertaineth to the house_. In\nNehemiah i. 1 Shushan is described as a _b\u012br\u0101h_, probably as being a\nfortress as well as a royal city. See G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Jerusalem_, II. 347.\n\nThe Temple is frequently called _h\u0113yk\u0101l_ (_palace_, _great house_) in\nthe Old Testament, but the normal appellation is simply _kabbayith_\n(_the house_) or such a phrase as _the house of the Lord_, or again\n_q\u01d2dsh\u011bkh\u0101_ (_Thy sanctuary_).\n\n \u00b2Now I have prepared with all my might for the house of my\n God the gold for the _things of_ gold, and the silver for the\n _things of_ silver, and the brass for the _things of_ brass, the\n iron for the _things of_ iron, and wood for the _things of_ wood;\n onyx\u00b9 stones, and _stones_ to be set, stones for inlaid work,\n and of divers colours, and all manner of precious stones, and\n marble stones in abundance.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _beryl_.\n\n=2.= _onyx_] or, as margin, _beryl_. Compare Genesis ii. 12 (margin\n_beryl_).\n\n_stones for inlaid work_] Compare Isaiah liv. 11, _I will lay thy\nstones with fair colours_ (the same word is used in Hebrew).\n\n \u00b3Moreover also, because I have set my affection to the house of\n my God, seeing that I have a treasure of mine own of gold and\n silver, I give it unto the house of my God, over and above all\n that I have prepared for the holy house;\n\n=3.= _I give it_] not all his private fortune, but the splendid\noffering announced in verses 4, 5. David then challenges the leaders to\ndisplay a like generosity (verse 5).\n\n_even three thousand talents of gold_, etc.] i.e. about \u00a320,000,000 or\n\u00a310,000,000 (light standard). The amount is impossibly vast, and may be\ncompared with the exaggeration noted in xxii. 14.\n\n \u2074even three thousand talents of gold, of the gold of Ophir, and\n seven thousand talents of refined silver, to overlay the walls\n of the houses withal:\n\n=4.= _gold of Ophir_] _Ophir_ is probably to be identified with some\npart of the south-east coast of Arabia; see note on 2 Chronicles viii.\n18. The reference here is no doubt an anachronism, for it is clear that\nIsraelite tradition regarded this trade with Ophir as an innovation of\nSolomon\u2019s reign (see 2 Chronicles viii. 18, ix. 10 = 1 Kings ix. 28,\nx. 11).\n\n_to overlay_] compare 2 Chronicles iii. 4\u20128.\n\n_the houses_] i.e. the porch, the greater house, and the most holy\nhouse; 2 Chronicles iii. 4, 5, 8.\n\n \u2075of gold for the _things of_ gold, and of silver for the _things\n of_ silver, and for all manner of work _to be made_ by the\n hands of artificers. Who then offereth willingly to consecrate\n himself\u00b9 this day unto the LORD?\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _to fill his hand_.\n\n=5.= _offereth willingly to consecrate himself_] The phrase _to\nconsecrate himself_ (Hebrew, _to fill his hand_) means properly _to\nmake himself a priest_, and is here used metaphorically. The sense is\n\u201cWho will give these gifts for the sacred Temple in the same willing\nspirit which is required of a priest in his self-dedication to priestly\nservice?\u201d\n\n\n =6\u20129.=\n THE OFFERINGS OF THE CHIEFS OF ISRAEL.\n\n \u2076Then the princes of the fathers\u2019 _houses_, and the princes of\n the tribes of Israel, and the captains of thousands and of\n hundreds, with the rulers over the king\u2019s work, offered\n willingly;\n\n=6.= _over the king\u2019s work_] See xxvii. 25\u201231.\n\n \u2077and they gave for the service of the house of God of gold five\n thousand talents and ten thousand darics, and of silver ten\n thousand talents, and of brass eighteen thousand talents, and of\n iron a hundred thousand talents.\n\n=7.= _five thousand talents_] i.e. of uncoined gold by weight, an\nimmense sum, compare verse 3.\n\n_ten thousand darics_] A _daric_ was a Persian gold coin worth about 22\nshillings. Used thus in connection with the reign of David, the word is\nof course a curious anachronism. The translation of Authorized Version\n_drams_ (i.e. drachm\u00e6) may possibly be right. The value of a gold\ndrachma was about 9s. 5d.\n\n \u2078And they with whom _precious_ stones were found gave them to\n the treasure of the house of the LORD, under the hand of Jehiel\n the Gershonite.\n\n=8.= _Jehiel the Gershonite_] Compare xxiii. 8, xxvi. 21, 22.\n\n \u2079Then the people rejoiced, for that they offered willingly,\n because with a perfect heart they offered willingly to the LORD:\n and David the king also rejoiced with great joy.\n\n=9.= _with a perfect heart_] i.e. with a single heart, ungrudgingly.\nCompare xxviii. 9, note.\n\n\n =10\u201219.=\n THE BLESSING OF DAVID.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation:\n and David said, Blessed be thou, O LORD, the God of Israel our\n father, for ever and ever. \u00b9\u00b9Thine, O LORD, is the greatness,\n and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty:\n for all that is in the heaven and in the earth _is thine_; thine\n is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all.\n \u00b9\u00b2Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou rulest over all;\n and in thine hand is power and might; and in thine hand it is to\n make great, and to give strength unto all. \u00b9\u00b3Now therefore, our\n God, we thank thee, and praise thy glorious name.\n\n=11.= _thou art exalted as head above all_] Better =thine it is to be\nexalted as head over all=.\n\n \u00b9\u2074But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able\u00b9\n to offer so willingly after this sort? for all things come of\n thee, and of thine own\u00b2 have we given thee.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _retain strength_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _of thine hand_.\n\n=14.= _be able_] Literally _retain strength_. David praises God for the\ngreat success of the efforts of so transitory a creature as man.\n\n_of thine own_] Literally _out of thine hand_, compare margin.\n\n \u00b9\u2075For we are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as all our\n fathers were: our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there\n is no abiding\u00b9. \u00b9\u2076O LORD our God, all this store that we have\n prepared to build thee an house for thine holy name cometh of\n thine hand, and is all thine own. \u00b9\u2077I know also, my God, that\n thou triest the heart, and hast pleasure in uprightness. As for\n me, in the uprightness of mine heart I have willingly offered\n all these things: and now have I seen with joy thy people, which\n are present here, to offer willingly unto thee.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _hope_.\n\n=15.= _strangers before thee, and sojourners_] David describes himself\nand his people not as strangers _to_ God, but as strangers _dwelling\nbefore_ God. In ancient states foreigners were sometimes allowed to\nreside in the capital under the immediate protection of the king or\nof the heads of the state; compare 1 Samuel xxii. 3, 4, xxvii. 3;\n2 Samuel xv. 19; compare also the position of the aliens at Athens.\nDavid appeals to God on the ground that Israel is immediately under\nGod\u2019s protection. Compare Psalms xxxix. 12.\n\n_no abiding_] Or, as margin, _hope_; i.e. no continuance, no hopeful\nexpectation, apart from the favour of Jehovah.\n\n \u00b9\u2078O LORD, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Israel, our\n fathers, keep this for ever in the imagination of the thoughts\n of the heart of thy people, and prepare\u00b9 their heart unto thee:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _establish_.\n\n=18.= _in the imagination_] Render, =as the imagination=. _Imagination_\nhere means not the faculty, but the result of the exercise of the\nfaculty, a _mental image_ or _impression_.\n\n_prepare_] Better, as margin, =establish=. David prays that the people\nmay continue in their present mind.\n\n \u00b9\u2079and give unto Solomon my son a perfect heart, to keep thy\n commandments, thy testimonies, and thy statutes, and to do all\n these things, and to build the palace, for the which I have made\n provision.\n\n=19.= _a perfect heart_] See xxviii. 9, note.\n\n_the palace_] See verse 1, note.\n\n\n =20\u201222.=\n THE GREAT REJOICING.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD\n your God. And all the congregation blessed the LORD, the God of\n their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the\n LORD, and the king.\n\n=20.= _worshipped_] i.e. prostrated themselves.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And they sacrificed sacrifices unto the LORD, and offered\n burnt offerings unto the LORD, on the morrow after that day,\n even a thousand bullocks, a thousand rams, and a thousand lambs,\n with their drink offerings, and sacrifices in abundance for all\n Israel;\n\n=21.= _And they sacrificed_] Compare xvi. 1\u20123.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2and did eat and drink before the LORD on that day with great\n gladness. And they made Solomon the son of David king the second\n time, and anointed him unto the LORD to be prince\u00b9, and Zadok to\n be priest.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _leader_.\n\n=22.= _the second time_] Compare xxiii. 1. The first time which is\ndescribed in 1 Kings i. 39 (Solomon hastily anointed in order to assert\nhis claim to the throne against his brother Adonijah) is omitted in\nChronicles, unless perhaps the vague phrase of xxiii. 1 \u201cNow David ...\nmade Solomon his son king over Israel\u201d is intended to refer to it.\n\n_Zadok_] One of Solomon\u2019s earliest acts seems to have been to put an\nend to the double priesthood by deposing Abiathar; compare 1 Kings\nii. 27, 35. The Chronicler appears to have this in mind, but he avoids\nnarrating anything so derogatory to the high-priesthood.\n\n\n =23\u201225.=\n THE BEGINNING OF SOLOMON\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of\n David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.\n\n=23.= _the throne of the LORD_] See xxviii. 5, note.\n\n \u00b2\u2074And all the princes, and the mighty men, and all the sons\n likewise of king David, submitted themselves\u00b9 unto Solomon the\n king.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _gave the hand under Solomon_.\n\n=24.= _the mighty men_] Compare 1 Kings i. 10, 38, from which it\nis clear that the faithfulness of Benaiah and the Cherethites and\nPelethites was the main factor in the elevation of Solomon to the\nthrone.\n\n_all the sons_] The Chronicler here glances at the submission of\nAdonijah (1 Kings i. 53).\n\n \u00b2\u2075And the LORD magnified Solomon exceedingly in the sight of all\n Israel, and bestowed upon him such royal majesty as had not been\n on any king before him in Israel.\n\n=25.= _such royal majesty as had not been on any king before him in\nIsrael_] Strictly speaking, the comparison is limited to Solomon on the\none side, and his predecessors, David and Saul (Ishbosheth is ignored\nin Chronicles) on the other, but we may suppose that the Chronicler\nis writing somewhat loosely from his own standpoint, and really means\nto say that Solomon was surpassed in glory by no king of Israel. It\nis just possible (compare Job xxxiv. 19) to render the Hebrew =royal\nmajesty which was not on any king more than on him in Israel=.\n\nIn Chronicles the character of Solomon is idealised somewhat in the\nsame fashion as that of David. He is depicted as the monarch who\nattained the ideal of inspired wisdom and of royal splendour, and\nwhose piety was supremely manifested in the privilege permitted him of\nbuilding and dedicating the Temple. In this last fact the Chronicler\ndoubtless felt that Solomon had a claim to the praises of posterity\nwhich completely outweighed any sinister traits of his character\nrevealed in Kings. Elsewhere he refers to Solomon\u2019s failings in order\nto point a moral; \u201cDid not Solomon, king of Israel, sin by these\nthings?... Even him did strange women cause to sin\u201d (Nehemiah xiii.\n26). But here, where he relates his reign as a whole, the darker\naspects\u2015\u2015his many wives and his tolerance of their idolatrous\nworship\u2015\u2015are passed over and only the king\u2019s zeal for Jehovah and\nthe glories of Israel in his day are allowed to appear.\n\n\n =26\u201230.=\n A SUMMARY OF DAVID\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b2\u2076Now David the son of Jesse reigned over all Israel. \u00b2\u2077And\n the time that he reigned over Israel was forty years; seven\n years reigned he in Hebron, and thirty and three _years_ reigned\n he in Jerusalem. \u00b2\u2078And he died in a good old age, full of days,\n riches, and honour: and Solomon his son reigned in his stead.\n\n=27.= _forty years_] Compare 2 Samuel v. 4, 5; 1 Kings ii. 11.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they\n are written in the history\u00b9 of Samuel the seer, and in the\n history\u00b9 of Nathan the prophet, and in the history\u00b9 of Gad the\n seer;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _words_.\n\n=29.= On the \u201chistories\u201d cited in this verse, see the Introduction,\n\u00a7\u00a05, pp. xxx\u2012xxxii. Compare 2 Chronicles ix. 29.\n\n_in the history_] literally _words_. The Book of Chronicles itself is\ncalled in Hebrew, _The words_ (or _the acts_) _of the days_.\n\n_Samuel the seer_] Compare 1 Samuel ix. 9, 19.\n\n_Nathan the prophet_] See 2 Samuel vii. 2 (= 1 Chronicles xvii. 1);\n2 Samuel xii. 1; 1 Kings i. 8\u201239.\n\n_Gad the seer_] See 2 Samuel xxiv. 11 (= 1 Chronicles xxi. 9), _Gad the\nprophet, David\u2019s seer_.\n\nIn the Hebrew Samuel is called _r\u014deh_ (_seer_), Nathan, _n\u0101b\u012b_\n(_prophet_), and Gad, _\u1e25\u014dzeh_ (_gazer_ or _seer of visions_).\n\n \u00b3\u2070with all his reign and his might, and the times that went over\n him, and over Israel, and over all the kingdoms of the countries.\n\n=30.= _the times_] i.e. the changes, vicissitudes. Compare xii. 32,\nnote.\n\n\n\n\n THE SECOND BOOK OF\n THE CHRONICLES\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS I.\u2012IX.\n SOLOMON.\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\n\n =1\u20126.=\n SOLOMON\u2019S GREAT SACRIFICE AT GIBEON.\n\nVerses 1\u20125 are the composition of the Chronicler; for verse 6 compare\n1 Kings iii. 4.\n\n \u00b9AND Solomon the son of David was strengthened in his kingdom,\n and the LORD his God was with him, and magnified him exceedingly.\n\n=1.= _was strengthened_] or, _strengthened himself_, a favourite\nexpression of the Chronicler; compare xii. 13, xiii. 21 (_waxed\nmighty_), xvii. 1, xxiii. 1, etc.\n\n_magnified_] compare 1 Chronicles xxix. 25.\n\n \u00b2And Solomon spake unto all Israel, to the captains of thousands\n and of hundreds, and to the judges, and to every prince in all\n Israel, the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_.\n\n=2.= _unto all Israel_] The impression, conveyed in the preceding\nchapter, that Solomon\u2019s accession was marred by no internal discord in\nthe nation, is again emphasised.\n\n \u00b3So Solomon, and all the congregation with him, went to the\n high place that was at Gibeon; for there was the tent of meeting\n of God, which Moses the servant of the LORD had made in the\n wilderness.\n\n=3.= _the high place ... at Gibeon_] Compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 39, xxi.\n29; 1 Kings iii. 4. The passage in Kings na\u00efvely states that Solomon\noffered his sacrifice at Gibeon (6 miles north-west of Jerusalem)\n_because that was the great high place_. The Chronicler regarded the\nworship of the high-places as an illegal act, and sought to justify\nSolomon\u2019s action in this undeniable instance by the theory that the\ntent of meeting and the brasen altar (verse 5) were at the high-place\nof Gibeon (see the head-note to 1 Chronicles xiii.). Without doubt the\nhigh-place at Gibeon had been used by the Canaanites for worship from a\nvery early date.\n\n_in the wilderness_] See Exodus xxv. 1 ff., xxxv. 4 ff.\n\n \u2074But the ark of God had David brought up from Kiriath-jearim to\n _the place_ that David had prepared for it: for he had pitched a\n tent for it at Jerusalem.\n\n=4.= =Kiriath-jearim=] Compare 1 Chronicles xiii. 5.\n\n_pitched a tent_] compare 1 Chronicles xv. 1.\n\n \u2075Moreover the brasen altar, that Bezalel the son of Uri, the son\n of Hur, had made, was there\u00b9 before the tabernacle of the LORD:\n and Solomon and the congregation sought unto it.\n\n \u00b9 Or, as otherwise read, _he had put_.\n\n=5.= _Bezalel_] See Exodus xxxi. 2, xxxviii. 1\u20127, and compare 1\nChronicles ii. 20.\n\n_was there_] margin _he had put_. In the Hebrew the position of a point\nmakes the difference between these two translations.\n\n_sought unto it_] See 1 Chronicles xxviii. 8, note.\n\n \u2076And Solomon went\u00b9 up thither to the brasen altar before the\n LORD, which was at the tent of meeting, and offered a thousand\n burnt offerings upon it.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _offered there, upon ... yea, he offered_.\n\n=6.= _went up thither_] or, as margin, _offered there, upon_. It is to\nbe noted that the Chronicler does not ignore the exercise of priestly\nfunctions by Solomon, although such exercise must have seemed wrong in\nhis eyes, but follows his authority (1 Kings iii. 4) without adding any\nexplanation.\n\n\n =7\u201213= (= 1 Kings iii. 5\u201215).\n SOLOMON\u2019S VISION, AND RETURN TO JERUSALEM.\n\n \u2077In that night did God appear unto Solomon, and said unto him,\n Ask what I shall give thee. \u2078And Solomon said unto God, Thou\n hast shewed great kindness unto David my father, and hast made\n me king in his stead.\n\n=7.= _did God appear_] In Kings, _the LORD appeared in a dream_.\n\n \u2079Now, O LORD God, let thy promise unto David my father be\n established: for thou hast made me king over a people like the\n dust of the earth in multitude.\n\n=9.= _thy promise_] i.e. that Solomon would be king after David, that\nhe would build the Temple, and that his house would reign over Israel\nfor ever (1 Chronicles xxii. 9 ff.). Part of this promise had come\ntrue, and Solomon now prays for the fulfilment of the remainder. It is,\nhowever, possible that the particular reference is to the first words\nof 1 Chronicles xxii. 12, which may be translated as a promise, _Surely\nthe LORD will give thee wisdom and understanding_.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Give me now wisdom and knowledge, that I may go out and come\n in before this people: for who can judge this thy people, that\n is so great? \u00b9\u00b9And God said to Solomon, Because this was in\n thine heart, and thou hast not asked riches, wealth, or honour,\n nor the life of them that hate thee, neither yet hast asked long\n life; but hast asked wisdom and knowledge for thyself, that thou\n mayest judge my people, over whom I have made thee king:\n\n=10.= _go out and come in_] The phrase denotes the transaction of\nbusiness of all kinds.\n\n_judge_] Although every village by its headmen dispensed its own\njustice to its inhabitants, yet enough cases too hard for local\ndecision remained over to make the king\u2019s judicial functions of very\ngreat importance; compare 2 Samuel xiv. 4 ff., xv. 2\u20124.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give\n thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings\n have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any\n after thee have the like.\n\n=12.= _wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee_] The incident\nillustrates the truth that _To him that hath shall be given_; Solomon\nhad wisdom enough to offer a wise prayer; increase of wisdom followed\nas the answer to the prayer.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3So Solomon came _from his journey_\u00b9 to the high place that was\n at Gibeon, from before the tent of meeting, unto Jerusalem; and\n he reigned over Israel.\n\n \u00b9 The Septuagint and Vulgate have, _came from the high place_.\n\n=13.= from his journey _to the high place that was at Gibeon_] This\nclause yields no sense in the Hebrew and is probably a misplaced gloss.\nRead simply, =Then Solomon came to Jerusalem= (compare 1 Kings iii. 15),\nor, as margin following LXX., =came from the high place=....\n\n\n =14\u201217= (= 1 Kings x. 26\u201229).\n SOLOMON\u2019S HORSES AND CHARIOTS.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And Solomon gathered chariots and horsemen: and he had a\n thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen,\n which he placed in the chariot cities, and with the king at\n Jerusalem.\n\n=14.= _a thousand and four hundred chariots_] See note on ix. 25.\n\n_the chariot cities_] The greater part of Palestine is unsuitable for\nthe evolutions of chariots, but flat country is found along the coast\nof the Mediterranean, in the plain of Esdraelon, and east of Jordan,\nand in these three districts the chariot cities were probably situated.\nCompare G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_, p. 667,\nAppendix v.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the king made silver and gold to be in Jerusalem as stones,\n and cedars made he to be as the sycomore trees that are in the\n lowland, for abundance.\n\n=15.= _to be in Jerusalem as stones_] In Kings this is asserted of\nsilver only. Jerusalem is one of the stoniest places in the world.\nSee Kelman, _Holy Land_, pp. 9\u201211.\n\n_the sycomore trees_] See 1 Chronicles xxvii. 28, note.\n\n_lowland_] Literally _the Shephelah_; i.e. essentially the stretch\nof low hills separating the maritime plain from the hill country of\nJudah, yet perhaps also including the Philistine plain. See Hastings,\n_Dictionary of the Bible_ III. 893\u2012894.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And the horses which Solomon had were brought out of Egypt;\n the king\u2019s merchants received them in droves, each drove at a\n price.\n\n=16.= _And the horses which Solomon had were brought out of Egypt_]\nEgypt is an agricultural not a pastoral country; it lacks the broad\nplains suitable for the rearing of large numbers of horses. But the\nArabs of the Sinai peninsula stood in close political and mercantile\nrelations with Egypt, and it may be that though the horses were raised\nin Arabia and Central Asia they passed through Egyptian hands (Barnes\non 1 Kings x. 28). It is possible, however, that the reading _Egypt_ is\na mistake\u2015\u2015see the following note.\n\n_in droves, each drove at a price_] The word \u201cdroves\u201d is incorrectly\ntranslated \u201clinen yarn\u201d in the Authorized Version The rendering\n_droves_ is just possible; but it is probable that, on the basis of\nsome versions, we should read =from Ku\u2018i= (_or_ =Ku\u00eb=) =at a price=.\n_Ku\u00eb_ is a district mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions and generally\nidentified with Cilicia. It is further proposed that, instead of\n_Egypt_ (Hebrew _Mi\u1e63raim_), we should read _Mu\u1e63ri_, a name applied\n(1)\u00a0to Egypt, and (2)\u00a0extended beyond it to the area south of Palestine,\nand (3)\u00a0also denoting a district in north Syria, south of the Taurus,\nand named in Assyrian inscriptions. In this case, in connection with\n_Ku\u00eb_, we should identify it with the last mentioned.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And they fetched up, and brought out of Egypt a chariot for\n six hundred _shekels_ of silver, and an horse for an hundred and\n fifty: and so for all the kings of the Hittites, and the kings\n of Syria, did they bring them out by their means.\n\n=17.= _out of Egypt_] Hebrew _Mi\u1e63raim_. If the suggestion mentioned in\nthe previous note be adopted, then here also read _Mu\u1e63ri_, the north\nSyrian district.\n\n_and so ... by their means_] i.e. by means of Solomon\u2019s merchants\nhorses were exported for the kings of the Hittites and of Syria.\n\n_Hittites_] Settlements of Hittites seem to have existed here and there\nin Canaan, but in the regions north-east of Syria they formed a\npowerful state, able for many centuries to contend on equal terms with\nthe Assyrians and Egyptians. Their chief cities were Carchemish on the\nEuphrates and Kadesh on the Orontes. They were subdued in the eighth\ncentury by the Assyrians.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n SOLOMON\u2019S PREPARATIONS FOR BUILDING THE TEMPLE.\n\n\n =1, 2= [i. 18, ii. 1, Hebrew]\n (= verses 17, 18 below; 1 Kings v. 15).\n BEARERS AND HEWERS.\n\n \u00b9Now Solomon purposed to build an house for the name of the\n LORD, and an house for his kingdom.\n\n=1.= _for the name_] compare 1 Chronicles xxii. 7, 10, 19, xxviii. 3,\nxxix. 16.\n\n_an house for his kingdom_] See 1 Kings vii. 1\u20128.\n\n \u00b2And Solomon told out threescore and ten thousand men to bear\n burdens, and fourscore thousand men that were hewers in the\n mountains, and three thousand and six hundred to oversee them.\n\n=2.= _told out_] i.e. counted. The 150,000 bearers and hewers mentioned\nhere are said to have been _aliens_ (verse 17). This agrees with 1\nKings v. 15, which distinguishes them from a levy of 30,000 hewers\nraised out of all Israel (1 Kings v. verse 13). The 30,000 Israelites\nwere subject to a corv\u00e9e of one month in every three, the 150,000\naliens were presumably supposed to have been continuously engaged\non the work. The Chronicler makes no mention of the levy of 30,000\nIsraelites, recorded in Kings, for no doubt he thought it unfitting\nthat compulsory labour should be laid on the Israelites themselves. On\nthe other hand he holds that the 150,000 were _all_ aliens (see verses\n17, 18), whereas the writer in Kings, not having that scruple before\nhis mind, does not make any such sweeping assertion (compare, however,\n1 Kings ix. 20).\n\n\n =3\u201210= (compare 1 Kings v. 2\u20126).\n SOLOMON\u2019S MESSAGE TO HURAM.\n\nThis passage is much fuller in Chronicles than in 1 Kings, which offers\nno parallel to Solomon\u2019s language with regard to the Temple; verses 4\u20126.\nAgain, verse 7 (the request for a \u201ccunning man\u201d) has no nearer parallel\nthan 1 Kings vii. 13. For verse 10 also there is no strict parallel in\n1 Kings.\n\n \u00b3And Solomon sent to Huram\u00b9 the king of Tyre, saying, As thou\n didst deal with David my father, and didst send him cedars to\n build him an house to dwell therein, _even so deal with me_.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Kings v. 1, _Hiram_.\n\n=3.= _Huram_] Another form of _Hiram_ (1 Kings v. 1 [15, Hebrew]) which\nis a shortened form of _Ahiram_ (Hebrew _\u0100\u1e25_, \u201cbrother\u201d and _r\u0101m_,\n\u201cexalted\u201d). Yet another form is _Hirom_ (1 Kings v. 10; see Revised\nVersion margin). The Phoenician language is written with even fewer\nvowel signs than are found in ancient Hebrew; hence the uncertainty in\nthe form of this name.\n\n_didst send him cedars_] See 1 Chronicles xiv. 1 = 2 Samuel v. 11.\n\n \u2074Behold, I build an house for the name of the LORD my God, to\n dedicate it to him, and to burn before him incense of sweet\n spices, and for the continual shewbread, and for the burnt\n offerings morning and evening, on the sabbaths, and on the new\n moons, and on the set feasts of the LORD our God. This is _an\n ordinance_ for ever to Israel. \u2075And the house which I build is\n great; for great is our God above all gods.\n\n=4.= _the continual shewbread_] See 1 Chronicles ix. 32, notes;\nLeviticus xxiv. 5\u20129.\n\n_on the set feasts_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiii. 31, note.\n\n \u2076But who is able\u00b9 to build him an house, seeing the heaven and\n the heaven of heavens cannot contain him? who am I then, that I\n should build him an house, save only to burn incense before him?\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _retaineth strength_.\n\n=6.= _is able_] Literally _retaineth strength_] 1 Chronicles xxix. 14.\n\n_cannot contain him_] verses 4\u20126 are carefully framed to guard against\nthe careless imagination that the Temple is God\u2019s dwelling: to the\nChronicler it is only the spot where worship is offered. Compare vi.\n2, 18.\n\n \u2077Now therefore send me a man cunning to work in gold, and in\n silver, and in brass, and in iron, and in purple, and crimson,\n and blue, and that can skill to grave _all manner of_ gravings,\n _to be_ with the cunning men that are with me in Judah and in\n Jerusalem, whom David my father did provide.\n\n=7.= _can skill to grave_] Literally _knoweth how to grave_. To \u201cgrave\u201d\nis to \u201ccarve\u201d; compare 1 Kings vi. 29.\n\n_my father did provide_] See 1 Chronicles xxii. 15.\n\n \u2078Send me also cedar trees, fir\u00b9 trees, and algum\u00b2 trees, out of\n Lebanon: for I know that thy servants can skill to cut timber\n in Lebanon; and, behold, my servants shall be with thy servants,\n \u2079even to prepare me timber in abundance: for the house which I\n am about to build shall be wonderful great.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _cypress_.\n\n \u00b2 In 1 Kings x. 11, _almug trees_.\n\n=8.= _cedar trees_] See 1 Chronicles xxii. 4.\n\n_fir trees_] margin, _cypress trees_ (which however are not now\nindigenous on Lebanon).\n\n_algum trees_] called _almug trees_ in 1 Kings x. 11, 12 and there\ndescribed as coming from Ophir. According to 1 Kings v. 8 Solomon asked\nfor cedar and \u201cfir\u201d only; so that the mention of algum trees here is\nprobably incorrect. _Algum_ is perhaps _sandal-wood_.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And, behold, I will give to thy servants, the hewers that cut\n timber, twenty thousand measures\u00b9 of beaten wheat, and twenty\n thousand measures\u00b9 of barley, and twenty thousand baths of wine,\n and twenty thousand baths of oil.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _cors_.\n\n=10.= _measures_] Hebrew _cors_. A _cor_ was the same as a _homer_ =\nabout 11 bushels.\n\n_beaten wheat_] 1 Kings v. 11, _wheat for food_. The text is doubtful,\nand the phrase _beaten wheat_ occurs nowhere else and is uncertain in\nmeaning.\n\n_of barley_] The barley and wine are not mentioned in 1 Kings v. 11;\nthere wheat and oil only are mentioned.\n\n_twenty thousand baths of oil_] In 1 Kings v. 11 (Hebrew) _twenty cors\nof pure oil_. In liquid measure the _bath_ = about 8\u00bc gallons. As ten\n_baths_ went to a cor, the amount stated in Chronicles is a hundred\ntimes as much as the amount given in 1 Kings.\n\n\n =11\u201216= [10\u201215, Hebrew] (compare 1 Kings v. 7\u20129).\n HURAM\u2019S ANSWER TO SOLOMON.\n\nLike the preceding verses 3\u201210, these verses show considerable\nvariations from the parallel in Kings.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Then Huram the king of Tyre answered in writing, which he\n sent to Solomon, Because the LORD loveth his people, he hath\n made thee king over them. \u00b9\u00b2Huram said moreover, Blessed be the\n LORD, the God of Israel, that made heaven and earth, who hath\n given to David the king a wise son, endued with discretion and\n understanding, that should build an house for the LORD, and an\n house for his kingdom.\n\n=12.= The sequence is greatly improved if this verse is read before\nverse 11. Probably the transposition should be made.\n\n_God of Israel_] The Chronicler feels no incongruity in making Huram\nuse the language of a worshipper of Jehovah.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And now I have sent a cunning man, endued with understanding,\n of Huram\u00b9 my father\u2019s,\n\n \u00b9 Or, _even Huram my father_ See chapter iv. 16.\n\n=13.= _I have sent_] According to 1 Kings vii. 13 Solomon himself sent\nand fetched Hiram the artificer.\n\n_of Huram my father\u2019s_] Render either literally as margin, =even\nHuram my father=, or better, =even Huram my trusted counsellor=. Huram\nthe king calls Huram the artificer _my father_ as a title of honour.\nCompare iv. 16.\n\n \u00b9\u2074the son of a woman of the daughters of Dan, and his father was\n a man of Tyre, skilful to work in gold, and in silver, in brass,\n in iron, in stone, and in timber, in purple, in blue, and in\n fine linen, and in crimson; also to grave any manner of graving,\n and to devise any device: that there may be _a place_ appointed\n unto him with thy cunning men, and with the cunning men of my\n lord David thy father. \u00b9\u2075Now therefore the wheat and the barley,\n the oil and the wine, which my lord hath spoken of, let him send\n unto his servants:\n\n=14.= _of Dan_] in 1 Kings vii. 14, _of Naphtali_. The reading of\nChronicles may have arisen from Exodus xxxi. 6 (Oholiab one of the\nartificers of the _tabernacle_ was of the tribe _of Dan_).\n\n \u00b9\u2076and we will cut wood out of Lebanon, as much as thou shalt\n need: and we will bring it to thee in floats by sea to Joppa\u00b9;\n and thou shalt carry it up to Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Japho_.\n\n=16.= _Joppa_] Hebrew _Japho_, modern _Jaffa_ (_Y\u0101f\u0101_).\n\n\n =17, 18= [16, 17, Hebrew] (compare verse 2 above).\n BEARERS AND HEWERS.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And Solomon numbered all the strangers that were in the land\n of Israel, after the numbering wherewith David his father had\n numbered them; and they were found an hundred and fifty thousand\n and three thousand and six hundred.\n\n=17.= _David his father_] See 1 Chronicles xxii. 2.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And he set threescore and ten thousand of them to bear burdens,\n and fourscore thousand that were hewers in the mountains, and\n three thousand and six hundred overseers to set the people awork.\n\n=18.= As the separate numbers given in this verse equal the total\n(150,000) given in verse 17, evidently the Chronicler thought that all\nthe aliens in the land were forced to take part in the work!\n\n_three thousand and six hundred overseers_] In 1 Kings v. 16,\n_three thousand and three hundred_. _Three_ in Hebrew (which may be\nrepresented in English by the letters SLS) is easily corrupted into\n_six_ (= SS in English letters). Compare also viii. 10 (= 1 Kings\nix. 23).\n\n_awork_] i.e. _on work, to work_.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n\n\n =1, 2.=\n THE TEMPLE BEGUN.\n\nVerse 1 has no parallel in Kings; for verse 2 compare 1 Kings vi. 1.\n\n \u00b9Then Solomon began to build the house of the LORD at Jerusalem\n in mount Moriah, where _the LORD_ appeared unto David his father,\n which he made ready\u00b9 in the place that David\u00b2 had appointed, in\n the threshing-floor of Ornan\u00b3 the Jebusite.\n\n \u00b9 The Septuagint and Vulgate have, _in the place which David\n had prepared, in the threshing-floor &c._\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _in the place of David_.\n\n \u00b3 In 2 Samuel xxiv. 16, &c., _Araunah_.\n\n=1.= _in mount Moriah_] Genesis xxii. 2.\n\n_which he made ready in the place that David had appointed_] Read\nrather, as margin, =in the place which David had prepared= (so LXX.).\n\n_Ornan the Jebusite_] See 1 Chronicles xxi. 15 ff.\n\n \u00b2And he began to build in the second _day_ of the second month,\n in the fourth year of his reign.\n\n=2.= _in the second_ day] The words are absent from 1 Kings and should\nprobably be omitted here. The year according to 1 Kings was the four\nhundred and eightieth after the Exodus.\n\n\n =3= (= 1 Kings vi. 2).\n THE MEASUREMENTS OF THE TEMPLE.\n\n \u00b3Now these are the foundations which Solomon laid for\u00b9 the\n building of the house of God. The length by cubits after the\n first measure was threescore cubits, and the breadth twenty\n cubits.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _these are the things wherein Solomon was instructed\n for &c._\n\n=3.= _these are the foundations_] i.e. the measurements which follow\nstate the ground-plan of the Temple.\n\n_cubits after the first measure_] The _cubit_ was the length of the\nforearm from the elbow to the extremity of the middle finger, about 17\u00bd\ninches. A difficult verse in Ezekiel (xl. 5) seems to have given rise\nto the idea that in early times the cubit was a somewhat longer measure,\nand that may be what the Chronicler intended by the present phrase\n\u201ccubits after the first (or _former_) measure.\u201d Exact measurements\non the site of the Temple have now demonstrated that about 17\u00bd inches\nwas at all times the standard length of the cubit (see _Palestine\nExploration Fund Statement_ October, 1915, pp. 186 f.).\n\n\n =4= (= 1 Kings vi. 3).\n THE PORCH.\n\n \u2074And the porch that was before _the house_, the length of it,\n according to the breadth of the house, was twenty cubits, and\n the height an hundred and twenty: and he overlaid it within with\n pure gold.\n\n=4.= _And the porch that was before_ the house] The Hebrew text is\ncorrupt, but the sense of the original reading has probably been\ncorrectly guessed by the Revised Version.\n\n_the height an hundred and twenty_] So also LXX. As the Temple was only\n30 cubits in height, this building was rather a tower than a porch. In\n1 Kings nothing is said about height. Most probably the true reading\nwas \u201ctwenty,\u201d not \u201can hundred and twenty\u201d; the \u201chundred\u201d being a\nmarginal gloss added by someone who was thinking of Herod\u2019s Temple of\nwhich the porch was 100 cubits in height.\n\n\n =5\u20127= (compare 1 Kings vi. 15, 21, 29, 30).\n THE TEMPLE.\n\n \u2075And the greater house he cieled with fir\u00b9 tree, which he\n overlaid with fine gold, and wrought thereon palm trees and\n chains.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _cypress_.\n\n=5.= _the greater house_] i.e. the holy place. It was _forty_ cubits\nlong (1 Kings vi. 17), whereas the shrine was _twenty_ (1 Kings vi. 16,\n20).\n\n_he cieled_] i.e. _lined_ or _boarded_. The same Hebrew word is\ntranslated _overlaid_ in this same verse.\n\n_wrought thereon_] perhaps in the form of reliefs.\n\n_palm trees and chains_] The \u201cchains\u201d perhaps connected one palm tree\nwith another. In 1 Kings vi. 29, \u201ccherubim and palm trees and open\nflowers.\u201d\n\n \u2076And he garnished the house with precious stones for beauty: and\n the gold was gold of Parvaim.\n\n=6.= _precious stones_] Not mentioned in the parallel account, but\naccording to 1 Kings v. 17 _costly stones_ (the same expression in\nHebrew) were used for the foundations of the house, their _costliness_\nbeing due presumably to their immense size. Here, however, the phrase\n\u201cfor beauty\u201d suggests that the Chronicler is thinking of rare and\nprecious stones to be set in the walls\u2015\u2015an exaggeration not out of\nkeeping with the references to \u201cpure gold\u201d in verses 4, 7, etc.\n\n_Parvaim_] Apparently the name of a place, but nothing certain is known\nabout it.\n\n \u2077He overlaid also the house, the beams, the thresholds, and the\n walls thereof, and the doors thereof, with gold; and graved\n cherubim on the walls.\n\n=7.= _cherubim_] The _cherubim_ (plural of _cherub_) were the Hebrew\nadaptation of the winged bulls which are so striking a figure in\nBabylonian and Assyrian art. Nothing, however, can be ascertained as\nto the exact form in which they were depicted in the Temple. In the Old\nTestament they appear as guardians of sacred things (Genesis iii. 24;\nEzekiel xxviii.) and as sustainers of the Deity (e.g. Psalms lxxx. 1\n\u201cThou that sittest upon the cherubim\u201d; compare Psalms xviii. 10). The\nfigures were therefore emblematic of the presence of Jehovah.\n\nThe graving of the cherubim was not felt to be a breach of the Second\nCommandment, for they were not put up to \u201cbow down to\u201d or to \u201cserve.\u201d\n\n\n =8, 9= (compare 1 Kings vi. 16\u201220).\n THE HOLY OF HOLIES.\n\n \u2078And he made the most holy house; the length thereof, according\n to the breadth of the house, was twenty cubits, and the breadth\n thereof twenty cubits: and he overlaid it with fine gold,\n amounting to six hundred talents. \u2079And the weight of the nails\n was fifty shekels of gold. And he overlaid the upper chambers\n with gold.\n\n=8.= _the most holy house_] Called _the oracle_ in 1 Kings vi. 16, 19,\netc., Hebrew _d\u0115b\u012br_, which means rather the _hinder part_. The Lord\n\u201cdwells\u201d in the inmost recess of the house.\n\n_amounting to six hundred talents_] This detail is not found elsewhere.\nThe weight of gold would be over 64,000 lbs., or, on a less probable\nreckoning, 27,000 lbs.; incredible quantities in either case, but in\nkeeping with the vast amounts stated in 1 Chronicles xxix. 4.\n\n\n =10\u201213= (compare 1 Kings vi. 23\u201228).\n THE CHERUBIM.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And in the most holy house he made two cherubim of image\n work; and they overlaid them with gold. \u00b9\u00b9And the wings of the\n cherubim were twenty cubits long: the wing of the one _cherub_\n was five cubits, reaching to the wall of the house; and the\n other wing was _likewise_ five cubits, reaching to the wing of\n the other cherub. \u00b9\u00b2And the wing of the other cherub was five\n cubits, reaching to the wall of the house: and the other wing\n was five cubits _also_, joining to the wing of the other cherub.\n\n=10.= _of image work; and they overlaid_] The phrase \u201cof image work\u201d\nis meaningless. Following the LXX. \u1f14\u03c1\u03b7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03be\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, render\n=woodwork, and he overlaid=.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3The wings of these cherubim spread themselves forth twenty\n cubits: and they stood on their feet, and their faces were\n toward the house\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _inward_.\n\n=13.= _twenty cubits_] Extending across the width of the whole house.\n\n_on their feet_] Not \u201ccouchant\u201d nor \u201crampant\u201d but standing, as the\nwinged bulls of Assyria stand.\n\n_toward the house_] as though to protect the Holiest Place from\nviolation by anyone advancing through the house.\n\n\n =14= (compare Exodus xxvi. 31, 32).\n THE VEIL.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And he made the veil of blue, and purple, and crimson, and\n fine linen, and wrought cherubim thereon.\n\nNo _veil_ for Solomon\u2019s Temple is mentioned in 1 Kings, but (1 Kings vi.\n31, 32) _doors_ of olive wood with cherubim carved upon them stood at\nthe entrance of the Holy of Holies. The description of the veil seems\nto have been borrowed by the Chronicler from the account of the\ntabernacle given in Exodus.\n\n\n =15\u201217= (compare 1 Kings vii. 15\u201222).\n THE PILLARS JACHIN AND BOAZ.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Also he made before the house two pillars of thirty and five\n cubits high, and the chapiter that was on the top of each of\n them was five cubits.\n\n=15.= _before the house two pillars_] Compare 1 Kings vii. 21, _he\nset up the pillars at the porch of the temple_, and Jeremiah lii. 17\n(translate, _the pillars ... that belonged to the house_). These\npillars were immediately in front of the porch, but (it seems) detached\nfrom it. They were cast in brass (iv. 11\u201217), were hollow (Jeremiah lii.\n21), and were crowned with \u201cchapiters\u201d (capitals) in shape like bowls\n(1 Kings vii. 41). A pair of lofty frontal pillars, detached from the\nmain building, was a not uncommon feature of temples in Western Asia\nand Egypt\u2015\u2015e.g. at the Temple of Hercules (Melkart) at Tyre (Herodotus\nII. 44), the Temple of Paphos in Cyprus (see W.\u00a0R. Smith, _Religion of\nthe Semites_\u00b2, p. 488), at Karnak in Egypt (compare Perrot and Chipiez,\n_Egyptian Art_, II. 170). In Solomon\u2019s Temple these twin columns may\nhave been conventional imitations of the prevailing type of temple\nbuilding, but it is rather to be supposed that there also they were\nconsidered to be symbolic of the presence of God, and were developments\nof the ancient stone pillars (_ma\u1e63\u1e63eboth_) which were a constant\nfeature at Semitic shrines and had originally been regarded as the\nabode of the Deity.\n\n_thirty and five cubits high_] 35 is also given in the LXX. of Jeremiah\nlii. 21; but is almost certainly an error. Read _eighteen_, as in 1\nKings vii. 15; Jeremiah lii. 21 (Hebrew).\n\n \u00b9\u2076And he made chains in the oracle, and put _them_ on the tops\n of the pillars; and he made an hundred pomegranates, and put\n them on the chains.\n\n=16.= _he made chains in the oracle_] The words, _in the oracle_,\nthough found in LXX., are a gloss introduced from 1 Kings vi. 21\n(_chains ... before the oracle_), or, more probably, a corruption of\na word meaning \u201clike a necklace.\u201d The Chronicler is here speaking of\nthe _outside_ of the Temple, having already described the \u201coracle,\u201d\ni.e. the Holy of Holies, in verses 8\u201214. The Hebrew word _d\u0115b\u012br_ was\ntranslated \u201coracle\u201d because it was supposed to be derived from a word\nmeaning \u201cto speak.\u201d It means, however, simply \u201cthe hindermost part\u201d of\nthe house (compare iv. 20, v. 7, 9).\n\n \u00b9\u2077And he set up the pillars before the temple, one on the right\n hand, and the other on the left; and called the name of that on\n the right hand Jachin\u00b9, and the name of that on the left Boaz\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 That is, _He shall establish_.\n\n \u00b2 That is, perhaps, _In it is strength_.\n\n=17.= _Jachin ... Boaz_] Margin translates the two words; _Jachin_\n\u201cHe shall establish,\u201d _Boaz_ perhaps \u201cIn it is strength.\u201d LXX. gives\n\u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c1\u03b8\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u201csetting up\u201d) and \u1f38\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03c2 (\u201cstrength\u201d). The meaning of _Boaz_\nis uncertain. It may be only a pious correction of an original _Baal_.\n(For the avoidance of the word _Baal_, see the notes on xvii. 3,\n1 Chronicles viii. 33; and for further comments on \u201cJachin\u201d and\n\u201cBoaz\u201d see _Encyclopedia Biblia_ II. 2. 304, and Barnes in _Journal\nof Theological Studies_, v. 447 ff.)\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n\n\n =1.=\n THE ALTAR OF BRASS.\n\n \u00b9Moreover he made an altar of brass, twenty cubits the length\n thereof, and twenty cubits the breadth thereof, and ten cubits\n the height thereof.\n\n=1.= _an altar of brass, twenty cubits_] The brasen altar is referred\nto in 1 Kings viii. 64; 2 Kings xvi. 14 ff., but it is (strangely) not\nmentioned among the furnishings of the Temple described in the present\ntext of 1 Kings vii. It is impossible therefore to say whether the\nChronicler derives the measurements he here gives from a text of Kings\nwhich did contain a description of the brasen altar, or from the altar\nof the Temple of his own period. The latter is more probable. Some\nscholars consider it possible that at first Solomon\u2019s Temple contained\nno artificial altar, the sacrifices being offered on the great natural\nrock which is now covered by the famous building popularly known as the\nMosque of Omar (properly \u201cThe Dome of the Rock\u201d).\n\nThe great altar was probably a flat oblong expanse, the highest of\na series of terraces, of which the base measurement is given by the\nChronicler\u2015\u2015compare the description of Ezekiel\u2019s altar (Ezekiel xliii.\n13 ff.).\n\n\n =2\u20125= (= 1 Kings vii. 23\u201226).\n THE MOLTEN SEA.\n\n \u00b2Also he made the molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim,\n round in compass, and the height thereof was five cubits; and a\n line of thirty cubits compassed it round about.\n\n=2.= _he made the molten sea_] Render, =he made the sea of molten\nmetal=. The \u201csea\u201d or great laver was a well-known feature in temples\n(compare Revelation iv. 6), and, originally at least, is likely to have\nhad religious significance, as a symbol of Jehovah\u2019s power over the\nseas and the rain, or over the primeval Deep upon which His might was\nexercised in the creation of the world (Genesis i.; Psalms xxiv. 2).\nFor the Chronicler\u2019s view of its purpose, see verse 6.\n\n_ten cubits from brim to brim ... and a line of thirty cubits compassed\nit_] The mathematical inaccuracy in the measurements here given\u2015\u201510\nin diameter, 30 in circumference\u2015\u2015has often been pointed out. But\nthe literal Hebrew is \u201cten _with_ the cubit ... and thirty _with_ the\ncubit,\u201d and F.\u00a0C. Burkitt in a communication to the _Cambridge Review_\nfor May 13, 1914 offers an interesting vindication of the phrase. He\nwrites \u201c... What the verse says about the circumference of the \u2018sea\u2019\nis that they stretched a string round it, and when they laid the string\nout flat they had to go thirty times with the cubit, i.e. a man had\nto put his elbow down thirty times before he got to the end.\u201d [The\ndistance from the point of the elbow to the tip of the longest finger\nis 1 cubit. ] \u201cNo doubt the last time he put his elbow down the string\ncame short: in other words, the \u2018sea\u2019 was nine-and-a-bittock across and\ntwenty-nine-and-a-bittock round. As a matter of fact, if a circle be\n9 ft. 6 in. across, it is just over 29 ft. 10 in. round. Such a circle\nI think would be described in Hebrew as \u2018ten with the foot-rule\u2019 across\nand \u2018thirty with the foot-rule\u2019 in circumference.\u201d\n\n_a line of thirty cubits compassed it_] i.e. it was thirty cubits in\ncircumference.\n\n \u00b3And under it was the similitude of oxen\u00b9, which did compass it\n round about, for ten cubits\u00b2, compassing the sea round about.\n The oxen\u00b9 were in two rows, cast when it was cast.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Kings vii. 24, _knops_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _ten in a cubit_.\n\n=3.= _under it was the similitude of oxen_] This reading has the\nsupport of the LXX., but can hardly be correct. Read (compare 1 Kings\nvii. 24), =under it there were knops=, \u201cknops\u201d being embossed ornaments,\nimitating probably the fruit or the flowers of the gourd.\n\n_for ten cubits_] Obviously an error, for the \u201cknops\u201d encircle the sea,\nand its circumference was thirty not ten cubits. The rendering of the\nmargin \u201cten in a cubit\u201d gives good sense, but is not a fair translation.\nWhatever the mistake in the Hebrew may be, it appears in 1 Kings vii.\n24 also.\n\n_The oxen were in two rows, cast when it was cast_] Correct the reading\nas before and render, =The knops were in two rows, cast when it was\ncast=. It is mentioned as a triumph of the founder\u2019s art that the laver\nwas cast _complete_, with its ornaments, from the first.\n\n \u2074It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north,\n and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the\n south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set\n upon them above, and all their hinder parts were inward.\n\n=4.= _three ... and three ... and three ... and three_] Thus the base\nstood \u201cfoursquare,\u201d satisfying the Hebrew idea of completeness; compare\nRevelation xxi. 12\u201216.\n\n \u2075And it was an handbreadth thick; and the brim thereof was\n wrought like the brim of a cup, like the flower of a lily: it\n received and held three thousand baths.\n\n=5.= _three thousand baths_] In 1 Kings vii. 26, _two thousand baths_.\nWhether the textual corruption is to be attributed to 1 Kings or to\nChronicles cannot be determined, and further even _two thousand baths_\nis an amount exceeding the capacity of a vessel with the measurements\ngiven for the _sea_ above. The bath was a measure for liquids equal to\nabout 8\u00bc gallons.\n\n\n =6= (compare verse 14 and 1 Kings vii. 38, 39).\n THE LAVERS.\n\n \u2076He made also ten lavers, and put five on the right hand, and\n five on the left, to wash in them; such things as belonged to\n the burnt offering they washed in them: but the sea was for the\n priests to wash in.\n\n=6.= _the sea was for the priests to wash in_] See, however, the note\non verse 2 above regarding its probable significance in early times.\nFor this, the Chronicler\u2019s view of its purpose (as also that of the\nlavers), compare Exodus xxx. 18\u201221. The sea in particular would be\nsingularly awkward as a vessel for cleansing purposes, unless all that\nis meant is that it was used as the receptacle from which water for\npurification was drawn.\n\n\n =7= (= 1 Kings vii. 49).\n THE GOLDEN CANDLESTICKS.\n\n \u2077And he made the ten candlesticks of gold according to the\n ordinance concerning them; and he set them in the temple, five\n on the right hand, and five on the left.\n\n=7.= _ten candlesticks_] Rather, =the ten lamp-stands=. Allusion to\n_ten_ lamp-stands or candlesticks is found elsewhere only in 1 Kings\nvii. 49, a late passage. In view of the frequent references to _one_\ncandlestick with seven lamps (compare Zechariah iv.; Exodus xxv.\n31 ff.), the question arises whether the _ten_ ever had historical\nreality, or were simply a fiction of tradition. The reference to\ncandlesticks of gold and of silver in 1 Chronicles xxviii. 15 does not\nhelp us, for it depends on the same evidence, sound or unsound, which\nthe Chronicler had for the present passage. Some scholars feel that\nthere must be some ground for the statement; but no positive conclusion\nis yet possible.\n\n_according to the ordinance_] Compare Exodus xxv. 31\u201237, xl. 4.\n\n_in the temple_] In 1 Kings vii. 49 more precisely, _before the oracle_,\ni.e. before the Holy of Holies.\n\n\n =8.=\n THE TABLES AND BASONS.\n\n \u2078He made also ten tables, and placed them in the temple, five\n on the right side, and five on the left. And he made an hundred\n basons of gold.\n\n=8.= _ten tables_] In verse 19 \u201cthe tables (_plural_) whereon was the\nshewbread\u201d are mentioned (compare 1 Chronicles xxviii. 16), but the\nparallel passage (1 Kings vii. 48) has \u201cthe table\u201d (_singular_), and\nelsewhere both in Chronicles and in the rest of the Old Testament one\ntable only is assigned to the shewbread (2 Chronicles xiii. 11, xxix.\n18). Probably therefore the ten tables here mentioned were _not_ for\nthe shewbread, although the Chronicler may have thought so. The same\nuncertainty attaches to this tradition of ten tables as to that of the\nten candlesticks (see previous note); and it is held by some that these\ntables were for the support of the candlesticks.\n\n_basons_] These were used for dashing the blood of the sacrifices\nagainst the altar.\n\n\n =9, 10.=\n THE TWO COURTS.\n\n \u2079Furthermore he made the court of the priests, and the great\n court, and doors for the court, and overlaid the doors of them\n with brass.\n\n=9.= _the court of the priests, and the great court_] The phrases\nreflect the conditions of the second Temple with which the Chronicler\nwas familiar, when the inner court was confined to the use of the\npriests, the outer one being for the people. Solomon\u2019s Temple,\nstrictly speaking, had only _one_ court, for in \u201cthe other court\u201d stood\nSolomon\u2019s house (1 Kings vii. 8). This \u201cother court\u201d seems to be called\nthe \u201cmiddle court\u201d (2 Kings xx. 4, margin), and the \u201cupper court\u201d\n(Jeremiah xxxvi. 10). The \u201cgreat court\u201d (1 Kings vii. 12) was perhaps\na third court containing not only the king\u2019s house, but all the\nroyal buildings as well. The Hebrew word for \u201ccourt\u201d in all the above\npassages is _\u1e25\u0101\u1e63\u0113r_, but here the \u201ccourt (_\u1e25\u0101\u1e63\u0113r_) of the priests\u201d\nis distinguished from a court called the \u201cgreat court\u201d (Hebrew \u201cgreat\n_\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_\u201d). Perhaps the Chronicler wishes to make the same distinction\nwhen he says that Solomon\u2019s great prayer was offered (vi. 13) in \u201cthe\ncourt\u201d (Hebrew _\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_). Compare xx. 5 (note).\n\n \u00b9\u2070And he set the sea on the right side _of the house_ eastward,\n toward the south.\n\n=10.= _the sea_] See verses 2\u20125. Its position is stated in accordance\nwith 1 Kings vii. 39.\n\n\n =11\u201218= (= 1 Kings vii. 40\u201247).\n THE WORKS OF HURAM.\n\nThis section is taken from the parallel passage of 1 Kings. The\nvariations are few.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And Huram made the pots, and the shovels, and the basons. So\n Huram made an end of doing the work that he wrought for king\n Solomon in the house of God:\n\n=11.= _Huram_] For the form of the name see note on ii. 3.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2the two pillars, and the bowls, and the two chapiters which\n were on the top of the pillars; and the two networks to cover\n the two bowls of the chapiters that were on the top of the\n pillars; \u00b9\u00b3and the four hundred pomegranates for the two\n networks; two rows of pomegranates for each network, to cover\n the two bowls of the chapiters that were upon\u00b9 the pillars.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _upon the face of the pillars_.\n\n=12.= _two pillars_] See iii. 15\u201217.\n\n_the bowls_] i.e. the bowl-shaped part of the capital of a pillar.\n\n_the chapiters_] In modern English \u201ccapitals.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2074He made also the bases, and the lavers made he upon the bases;\n \u00b9\u2075one sea, and the twelve oxen under it.\n\n=14.= _He made also the bases, and the lavers made he upon the bases_]\nA simple correction of the Hebrew text gives, =And the ten bases and\nthe ten lavers on the bases=, as in 1 Kings vii. 43.\n\n \u00b9\u2076The pots also, and the shovels, and the fleshhooks, and all\n the vessels thereof, did Huram his father make for king Solomon\n for the house of the LORD of bright brass.\n\n=16.= _the fleshhooks_] Hebrew _mizl\u0101g\u014dth_. In verse 11 and 1 Kings\nvii. 45 (the parallel passages) _the basons_ (Hebrew _mizr\u0101\u1e33\u014dth_).\n\n_Huram his father_] See note on ii. 13.\n\n \u00b9\u2077In the plain of Jordan did the king cast them, in the clay\n ground between Succoth and Zeredah.\n\n=17.= _in the clay ground_] G.\u00a0A. Smith (_Historical Geography_, p.\n488) speaks of traces of old brick-fields found by Sir C. Warren in the\nJordan valley. It is possible, however, that the Hebrew is defective\nand that the true reading is =at the ford of Adamah=, but on the whole\nit is best to keep the reading in the text (see Barnes on 1 Kings vii.\n46).\n\n_Succoth_] Succoth is probably _Tell Deir \u2018Alla_, east of Jordan, about\none mile north of the Jabbok.\n\n_Zeredah_] (1 Kings xi. 26); but in 1 Kings vii. 46 (Revised Version)\n_Zarethan_ (compare Joshua iii. 6, Revised Version). Its site is not\nknown, beyond the obvious inference that it was near the Jordan and not\nvery far from Succoth. Joshua iii. 16 states that it was near _Adam_\n(the modern _el Damieh_).\n\n \u00b9\u2078Thus Solomon made all these vessels in great abundance: for\n the weight of the brass could not be found out\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _was not searched out_.\n\n=18.= _Thus Solomon made all these vessels in great abundance_] In\n1 Kings vii. 47, _And Solomon left all the vessels_ unweighed, _because\nthey were exceeding many_.\n\n\n =19\u2012V. 1= (= 1 Kings vii. 48\u201251).\n THE VESSELS OF GOLD.\n\n THE COMPLETION OF THE WORK.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And Solomon made all the vessels that were in the house of God,\n the golden altar also, and the tables whereon was the shewbread;\n\n=19.= _the golden altar_] This was the altar of incense (compare 1\nMaccabees i. 21 ff.), which according to Exodus xxx. 1 ff. stood within\nthe tabernacle and was made of acacia wood (compare however, Exodus\nxxxix. 38). Both passages in Exodus are of late, post-exilic, date,\nand as no mention of this altar is made by Ezekiel, it was probably\na feature not of the first but of the second Temple.\n\n_the tables whereon was the shewbread_] In 1 Kings vii. 48 (parallel\npassage), _the table_ (singular); a reading probably to be accepted\nhere also; compare note on verse 8.\n\n \u00b2\u2070and the candlesticks with their lamps, that they should burn\n according to the ordinance before the oracle, of pure gold;\n\n=20.= _the oracle_] See note on iii. 16.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9and the flowers, and the lamps, and the tongs, of gold, and\n that perfect gold;\n\n=21.= _the flowers_] These were ornaments on the golden candlesticks;\ncompare Exodus xxxvii. 19.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2and the snuffers, and the basons, and the spoons, and the\n firepans, of pure gold: and as for the entry of the house, the\n inner doors thereof for the most holy place, and the doors of\n the house, _to wit_, of the temple, were of gold.\n\n=22.= _the firepans_] in which fire was carried to and from the altar.\n\n_the doors of the house_, to wit, _of the temple_] The \u201c[greater]\nhouse\u201d or \u201ctemple\u201d is here distinguished from the \u201cmost holy place\u201d\nor \u201cshrine.\u201d Compare iii. 5, 8.\n\n_were of gold_] According to the more probable reading of 1 Kings vii.\n50 the _hinges_ were of gold; the doors themselves were of olive wood\noverlaid with gold (1 Kings vi. 31, 32).\n\n \u00b9Thus all the work that Solomon wrought for the house of the\n LORD was finished. And Solomon brought in the things that David\n his father had dedicated; even the silver, and the gold, and all\n the vessels, and put them in the treasuries of the house of God.\n\n=CHAPTER V. 1.= _all the vessels_] the word may be taken to include\nweapons, spoils of war, compare 2 Samuel viii. 7 ff.; 1 Chronicles\nxviii. 11.\n\n\n\n\n V. 2\u2012VIII. 10.\n THE DEDICATION OF THE TEMPLE.\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n\n\n =2\u201210= (= 1 Kings viii. 1\u20129).\n THE ARK BROUGHT INTO THE SANCTUARY.\n\nThis section is taken almost verbatim from 1 Kings.\n\n \u00b2Then Solomon assembled the elders of Israel, and all the\n heads of the tribes, the princes of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of the\n children of Israel, unto Jerusalem, to bring up the ark of the\n covenant of the LORD out of the city of David, which is Zion.\n\n=2.= _Then Solomon assembled_] The same verb in the Hebrew as in 1\nChronicles xv. 3 (see note there) and in 1 Chronicles xxviii. 1.\n\n_the city of David_] See 1 Chronicles xi. 5, note on _the strong hold\nof Zion_.\n\n \u00b3And all the men of Israel assembled themselves unto the king at\n the feast, which was _in_ the seventh month.\n\n=3.= _the feast_] i.e. the Feast of Tabernacles, i.e. after the fruit\nharvest.\n\nin _the seventh month_] In 1 Kings the name of the month is given as\n_Ethanim_, but this word was perhaps obsolete when the Chronicler wrote;\nat any rate we know that in post-biblical times the seventh month was\nregularly called _Tisri_.\n\n \u2074And all the elders of Israel came, and the Levites took up the\n ark.\n\n=4.= _the Levites took up the ark_] According to 1 Kings the _priests_\nperformed this duty. In the days of David and Solomon all Levites were\npossible priests, Levi being the name of the priestly clan and not of a\nlower order of priests. At a later period the Levites were regarded as\na class subordinate to the priests, having duties distinct from those\nof the priests\u2015\u2015e.g. the task of bearing the tabernacle and all its\nfurniture (see Numbers i. 50, etc.). The Chronicler believing that this\ndistinction had been in force from the time of Moses onwards \u201ccorrects\u201d\nthe text of Kings by changing \u201cpriests\u201d into \u201cLevites\u201d: compare\n1 Chronicles xv. 2, 12, 13. See the special note on 1 Chronicles vi.,\npp. 51 f.\n\n \u2075And they brought up the ark, and the tent of meeting, and all\n the holy vessels that were in the Tent; these did the priests\n the Levites bring up. \u2076And king Solomon and all the congregation\n of Israel, that were assembled unto him, were before the ark,\n sacrificing sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor numbered\n for multitude.\n\n=5.= _the tent of meeting_] i.e. the Mosaic tabernacle, which the\nChronicler believed to have been in existence in the time of David and\nSolomon, and to have been at Gibeon (i. 3 f.). The parallel statement\nin Kings comes not from the early sources but from the hand of a late\nreviser.\n\n_the priests the Levites_] here the older phrase, which does not\nindicate a distinction between Priests and Levites, has been allowed\nto stand, perhaps \u201cbecause certain utensils might well have been borne\nby the priests\u201d (so Curtis), or possibly through slight carelessness on\nthe Chronicler\u2019s part. The parallel in Kings has \u201cthe priests _and_ the\nLevites.\u201d\n\n \u2077And the priests brought in the ark of the covenant of the LORD\n unto its place, into the oracle of the house, to the most holy\n place, even under the wings of the cherubim. \u2078For the cherubim\n spread forth their wings over the place of the ark, and the\n cherubim covered the ark and the staves thereof above.\n\n=7.= _the priests brought in the ark_] Only the priests might lawfully\nplace the Ark within the Holy of Holies (compare Numbers iv. 5 ff.).\nThe Chronicler therefore had no cause for changing _priests_ into\n_Levites_ here.\n\n_into the oracle_] See iii. 16, note.\n\n \u2079And the staves\u00b9 were so long that the ends of the staves were\n seen from the ark before the oracle; but they were not seen\n without: and there it is, unto this day.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _they drew out the staves, so that &c._\n\n=9.= _from the ark_] Read (with LXX. and 1 Kings viii. 8) =from the\nholy place=. One standing in the Holy Place and looking towards the\nHoly of Holies could see the heads of the staves.\n\n_and there it is, unto this day_] These words are taken over with\nthe loss of one letter (which here makes the difference between\nsingular and plural) from 1 Kings viii. 8, but they are out of place\nin Chronicles, for when the Chronicler wrote the Ark had long ago\ndisappeared. The vessels which were brought back from the Babylonian\ncaptivity are specified in Ezra i. 9, 10, but the Ark of the covenant\nis not reckoned among them.\n\n \u00b9\u2070There was nothing in the ark save the two tables which Moses\n put _there_ at Horeb, when\u00b9 the LORD made a covenant with the\n children of Israel, when they came out of Egypt.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _where_.\n\n=10.= _which Moses put_ there] Exodus xl. 20.\n\n_at Horeb_] Deuteronomy v. 2.\n\n\n =11\u201214= (= 1 Kings viii. 10, 11).\n THE DESCENT OF THE GLORY OF THE LORD.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of\n the holy place, (for all the priests that were present had\n sanctified themselves, and did not keep their courses;\n\n=11.= _out of the holy place_] The priests could remain neither in the\nHoly of Holies where they had deposited the Ark, nor even in the Holy\nPlace, but were driven altogether out of the Temple building into the\nTemple court (compare verse 14).\n\n=11\u201213=a. _for all ... his mercy_ endureth _for ever_] a long\nparenthesis added by the Chronicler to intimate that the whole body\nand not merely the monthly \u201ccourse\u201d of priests and of Levitical singers\nwere present (verses 11b\u201212); and to suggest the grandeur of the\nmusical service (verse 13a).\n\n=11.= _their courses_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv. 1\u201219.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2also the Levites which were the singers, all of them, even\n Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons and their brethren,\n arrayed in fine linen, with cymbals and psalteries and harps,\n stood at the east end of the altar, and with them an hundred and\n twenty priests sounding with trumpets:)\n\n=12.= _Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, and their sons_] Compare 1 Chronicles\nxxv. 1\u20127.\n\n_psalteries ... harps_] See 1 Chronicles xiii. 8, notes.\n\n_at the east end of the altar_] Looking westward, facing the Holy of\nHolies. To face the east was to turn the back upon the sanctuary;\nEzekiel viii. 16.\n\n_trumpets_] See 1 Chronicles xv. 24, note.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3it came even to pass, when the trumpeters and singers were\n as one, to make one sound to be heard in praising and thanking\n the LORD; and when they lifted up their voice with the trumpets\n and cymbals and instruments of music\u00b9, and praised the LORD,\n _saying_, For he is good; for his mercy _endureth_ for ever:\n that then the house was filled with a cloud, even the house of\n the LORD, \u00b9\u2074so that the priests could not stand to minister by\n reason of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD filled the house\n of God.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for song_.\n\n=13.= _of music_] Rather, as margin, =for song=.\n\n_for his mercy_ endureth _for ever_] 1 Chronicles xvi. 41.\n\n_was filled with a cloud_] Exodus xl. 34, 35.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n\n\n =1\u201211= (= 1 Kings viii. 12\u201221).\n SOLOMON\u2019S BLESSING.\n\n \u00b9Then spake Solomon, The LORD hath said that he would dwell\n in the thick darkness. \u00b2But I have built thee an house of\n habitation, and a place for thee to dwell in for ever. \u00b3And the\n king turned his face, and blessed all the congregation of Israel:\n and all the congregation of Israel stood. \u2074And he said, Blessed\n be the LORD, the God of Israel, which spake with his mouth unto\n David my father, and hath with his hands fulfilled it, saying,\n\n=1, 2.= These somewhat obscure verses come from 1 Kings, the only\nimportant variation being, _But I have built_ (Chronicles), for _I have\nsurely built_ (1 Kings). They seem to have been taken originally from\nsome old source of a poetical character, possibly the _Book of Jashar_\n(see Burney, _Notes on Hebrew Text of 1 Kings_, pp. 111 f.).\n\n=1.= _Then_] i.e. at the moment when Solomon perceived that the cloud\nhad filled the House.\n\n_that he would dwell in the thick darkness_] No Divine declaration\ncorresponding verbally with this occurs in the Old Testament, but\ncompare Exodus xx. 21, _Moses drew near to the thick darkness where\nGod was_, and Exodus xix. 9, _the LORD said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto\nthee in a thick cloud_.\n\n=2.= _But I have built_] The adversative _but_ is awkward, and the text\nin Kings (see above) is more suitable: Solomon has built a house in\nwhich the dark shrine seems a fitting abode for Him who wills to dwell\nin the \u201cthick darkness.\u201d\n\n \u2075Since the day that I brought forth my people out of the land of\n Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build\n an house in, that my name might be there; neither chose I any\n man to be prince\u00b9 over my people Israel: \u2076but I have chosen\n Jerusalem, that my name might be there; and have chosen David to\n be over my people Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _leader_.\n\n=5.= _neither chose I any man to be prince over my people Israel_] The\nChronicler regards Saul as rejected rather than chosen; 1 Chronicles\nx. 13, 14.\n\n_that my name might be there_] \u201cName\u201d is used, as regularly in this\nconnection, to signify the Divine character\u2015\u2015God conceived as that\nwhich He has revealed Himself to be.\n\n \u2077Now it was in the heart of David my father to build an house\n for the name of the LORD, the God of Israel. \u2078But the LORD said\n unto David my father, Whereas it was in thine heart to build an\n house for my name, thou didst well that it was in thine heart:\n\n=7.= _in the heart of David_] Compare 1 Chronicles xvii. 1, 2, xxii. 7.\n\n \u2079nevertheless thou shall not build the house; but thy son that\n shall come forth out of thy loins, he shall build the house for\n my name. \u00b9\u2070And the LORD hath performed his word that he spake;\n for I am risen up in the room of David my father, and sit on the\n throne of Israel, as the LORD promised, and have built the house\n for the name of the LORD, the God of Israel.\n\n=9.= _thou shalt not build_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxii. 8, note.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And there have I set the ark, wherein is the covenant of the\n LORD, which he made with the children of Israel.\n\n=11.= _the covenant_] i.e. the two tables of stone, compare v. 10.\n\n_with the children of Israel_] In 1 Kings viii. 21, _with our fathers,\nwhen he brought them out of the land of Egypt_.\n\n\n =12\u201239= (= 1 Kings viii. 22\u201250).\n SOLOMON\u2019S PRAYER.\n\nThe prayer is reproduced from 1 Kings with a few verbal changes and\nwith the omission of verses 50b\u201253. It is mainly a petition that future\nprayers made \u201cin\u201d or \u201ctoward this house\u201d may be heard. The subjects of\nthe different parts of the prayer are as follows:\u2015\u2015\n\n verses\n 14\u201217. The promise made to David.\n 18\u201221. Prayer made toward _this place_.\n 22, 23. The oath of ordeal taken in _this place_.\n 24, 25. Prayer under defeat.\n 26, 27. Prayer for rain.\n 28\u201231. Prayer under divers afflictions.\n 32, 33. The stranger\u2019s prayer.\n 34, 35. The prayer of the army at war abroad.\n 36\u201239. The prayer of Israel in captivity.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And he stood before the altar of the LORD in the presence\n of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands:\n \u00b9\u00b3(for Solomon had made a brasen scaffold, of five cubits long,\n and five cubits broad, and three cubits high, and had set it in\n the midst of the court; and upon it he stood, and kneeled down\n upon his knees before all the congregation of Israel, and spread\n forth his hands toward heaven:) \u00b9\u2074and he said, O LORD, the God\n of Israel, there is no God like thee, in the heaven, or in the\n earth; who keepest covenant and mercy with\u00b9 thy servants, that\n walk before thee with all their heart: \u00b9\u2075who hast kept with thy\n servant David my father that which thou didst promise him: yea,\n thou spakest with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine\n hand, as it is this day.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for_.\n\n=13.= _Solomon had made a brasen scaffold_] This \u201cscaffold\u201d is not\nmentioned in 1 Kings. The word used (_kiyy\u014dr_) properly means a \u201claver\u201d\n(so iv. 6), and perhaps the simple emendation _kiyy\u016bn_ = \u201cplatform\u201d\nshould be adopted.\n\n \u00b9\u2076Now therefore, O LORD, the God of Israel, keep with thy\n servant David my father that which thou hast promised him,\n saying, There shall not fail thee\u00b9 a man in my sight to sit on\n the throne of Israel; if only thy children take heed to their\n way, to walk in my law as thou hast walked before me. \u00b9\u2077Now\n therefore, O LORD, the God of Israel, let thy word be verified,\n which thou spakest unto thy servant David.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _There shall not be cut off unto thee a man from my\n sight._\n\n=16.= _walk in my law_] In 1 Kings viii. 25, _walk before me_. The\nChronicler characteristically introduces a reference to the Law of the\nLord (the _t\u014drah_). In Samuel and Kings neither David nor Solomon ever\nmentions this.\n\n \u00b9\u2078But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold,\n heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much\n less this house which I have builded!\n\n=18.= _dwell with men_] The words, _with men_, are absent from the\nHebrew text of 1 Kings, but appear in LXX. (A and B). Their presence\nhelps to spiritualize the idea of God \u201cdwelling on the earth.\u201d The\nPeshit\u1e6da (the Syriac translation of the Bible) still further limits\nthe sense and translates: _cause his Shekinah to dwell with_ (al. _rest\nupon_) _his people Israel_.\n\n \u00b9\u2079Yet have thou respect unto the prayer of thy servant, and to\n his supplication, O LORD my God, to hearken unto the cry and to\n the prayer which thy servant prayeth before thee:\n\n=19.= _prayer ... and ... supplication_] \u201cSupplication\u201d as\ndistinguished from \u201cprayer\u201d is _prayer for favour_.\n\n \u00b2\u2070that thine eyes may be open toward this house day and night,\n even toward the place whereof thou hast said that thou wouldest\n put thy name there; to hearken unto the prayer which thy servant\n shall pray toward this place.\n\n=20.= _which thy servant shall pray_] Solomon refers in this verse to\nfuture prayers, not (as in verse 19) to the prayer he is now praying.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And hearken thou to the supplications of thy servant, and of\n thy people Israel, when they shall pray toward this place: yea,\n hear thou from thy dwelling place, even from heaven; and when\n thou hearest, forgive.\n\n=21.= _from thy dwelling place, even from heaven_] Here, as in verse\n18, Solomon refuses to regard the Temple as Jehovah\u2019s \u201cdwelling place.\u201d\nCompare ii. 6.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2If a man sin\u00b9 against his neighbour, and an oath be laid\n upon him to cause him to swear, and he come _and_ swear before\n thine altar in this house: \u00b2\u00b3then hear thou from heaven, and do,\n and judge thy servants, requiting the wicked, to bring his way\n upon his own head; and justifying the righteous, to give him\n according to his righteousness.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Whereinsoever a man shall sin_.\n\n=22.= _and an oath be laid upon him_] Compare Exodus xxii. 11. When\nan accused man attests his innocence before the altar of the Temple\neither by invoking on himself a curse (the _oath of ordeal_) or by\nallowing the priest to invoke one upon him, then may Jehovah judge the\nmatter, allowing the innocent to escape unharmed from the ordeal, and\nfulfilling the curse against the guilty!\n\n \u00b2\u2074And if thy people Israel be smitten down before the enemy,\n because they have sinned against thee; and shall turn again and\n confess thy name, and pray and make supplication before thee in\n this house: \u00b2\u2075then hear thou from heaven, and forgive the sin\n of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which\n thou gavest to them and to their fathers. \u00b2\u2076When the heaven is\n shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against\n thee; if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and\n turn from their sin, when\u00b9 thou dost afflict\u00b2 them: \u00b2\u2077then hear\n thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy\n people Israel, when\u00b2 thou teachest them the good way wherein\n they should walk; and send rain upon thy land, which thou hast\n given to thy people for an inheritance.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _because_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _answerest_.\n\n=24.= _and shall turn again_] i.e. repent.\n\n \u00b2\u2078If there be in the land famine, if there be pestilence, if\n there be blasting or mildew, locust or caterpiller; if their\n enemies besiege them in the land of their cities\u00b9; whatsoever\n plague or whatsoever sickness there be; \u00b2\u2079what prayer and\n supplication soever be made by any man, or by all thy people\n Israel, which shall know every man his own plague and his own\n sorrow, and shall spread forth his hands toward this house:\n \u00b3\u2070then hear thou from heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive,\n and render unto every man according to all his ways, whose heart\n thou knowest; (for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of\n the children of men;) \u00b3\u00b9that they may fear thee, to walk in thy\n ways, so long as they live in the land which thou gavest unto\n our fathers.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _gates_.\n\n=28.= _blasting_] The phrase applies to the damage to vegetation in\nPalestine which is caused by the winds that blow in from the deserts to\nthe east and south (see Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_\np. 67). Such winds are spoken of as coming from the east (Genesis xli.\n6; Hosea xiii. 15) or from the south (Luke xii. 55).\n\n_caterpiller_] Rather some kind of locust; see Driver on Joel i. 4.\n\n_in the land of their cities_] literally _in the land of their gates_.\nThe text is probably corrupt: read either, =in any one of their\ncities= (compare LXX.), or, =by making a breach in their gates= (Hebrew\n_biph\u0115r\u014d\u1e63_ for _b\u2019ere\u1e63_).\n\n_whatsoever plague_] \u201cPlague\u201d is used here in the general sense of\n_calamity_, as in the phrase, \u201cThe Ten Plagues of Egypt.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u00b2Moreover concerning the stranger, that is not of thy people\n Israel, when he shall come from a far country for thy great\n name\u2019s sake, and thy mighty hand, and thy stretched out arm;\n when they shall come and pray toward this house: \u00b3\u00b3then hear\n thou from heaven, even from thy dwelling place, and do according\n to all that the stranger calleth to thee for; that all the\n peoples of the earth may know thy name, and fear thee, as doth\n thy people Israel, and that they may know that this house\u00b9 which\n I have built is called by thy name. \u00b3\u2074If thy people go out to\n battle against their enemies, by whatsoever way thou shalt send\n them, and they pray unto thee toward this city which thou hast\n chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _thy name is called upon this house &c._\n\n=32, 33.= Compare Isaiah lvi. 6 f. (also a post-exilic passage) where\nit is also said that the stranger must \u201ckeep the sabbath from profaning\nit and hold fast by my covenant\u201d before he can hope to be heard by\nJehovah.\n\n \u00b3\u2075then hear thou from heaven their prayer and their supplication,\n and maintain their cause\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _right_.\n\n=35.= _maintain their cause_] Render with margin, =maintain their\nright=.\n\n \u00b3\u2076If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth\n not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy,\n so that they carry them away captive\u00b9 unto a land far off or\n near; \u00b3\u2077yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither\n they are carried captive, and turn again, and make supplication\n unto thee in the land of their captivity, saying, We have sinned,\n we have done perversely, and have dealt wickedly;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _they that take them captive carry them away_.\n\n=36.= _there is no man that sinneth not_] Compare Ecclesiastes vii. 20.\n\n \u00b3\u2078if they return unto thee with all their heart and with all\n their soul in the land of their captivity, whither they have\n carried them captive, and pray toward their land, which thou\n gavest unto their fathers, and the city which thou hast chosen,\n and toward the house which I have built for thy name:\n\n=38.= _if they return_] Compare Leviticus xxvi. 39\u201241; Deuteronomy xxx.\n1, 2 (passages anticipating captivity and also repentance in captivity).\n\n \u00b3\u2079then hear thou from heaven, even from thy dwelling place,\n their prayer and their supplications, and maintain their cause\u00b9;\n and forgive thy people which have sinned against thee.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _right_.\n\n=39.= _their cause_] Render with margin, =their right= (as in verse 35).\n\n\n =40\u201242= (no parallel in 1 Kings).\n THE INVOCATION.\n\nThe end of the prayer in 1 Kings viii. 51\u201253 is quite different, and\nless effective.\n\n \u2074\u2070Now, O my God, let, I beseech thee, thine eyes be open; and\n let thine ears be attent, unto the prayer that is made in this\n place.\n\n=40.= _attent_] i.e. attentive. Compare vii. 15 (the same English word\nfor the same Hebrew word).\n\n \u2074\u00b9Now therefore arise, O LORD God, into thy resting place, thou,\n and the ark of thy strength: let thy priests, O LORD God, be\n clothed with salvation, and let thy saints rejoice in goodness\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _good_.\n\n=41.= _Now therefore arise_] This whole verse corresponds (with\nsome variation of reading) with verses 8, 9 of Psalm cxxxii. For the\ninvocation to arise, compare Numbers x. 35, the ancient chant of the\nArk.\n\n_the ark of thy strength_] This appellation of the Ark refers to its\nuse in war; compare 1 Samuel iv. 3, 6, 7.\n\n_with salvation_] i.e. with victory. In Psalms cxxxii. 9, _with\nrighteousness_. The thought in Chronicles and in Psalms cxxxii. is the\nsame, for through victory the human victor receives _salvation_ (i.e.\ndeliverance from the enemy), and the Divine Giver of victory asserts\nHis _righteousness_ (i.e. by giving victory to the right).\n\n_thy saints_] i.e. thy people Israel regarded as faithful worshippers\nof Jehovah; compare Psalms lxxix. 2, Psalms cxlix. 5. So in the New\nTestament the Christians as a body are spoken of as \u201csaints\u201d and\n\u201csanctified.\u201d\n\n_rejoice in goodness_] Render (with margin), =rejoice in good=, i.e. in\nprosperity. In Psalms cxxxii. 9, _shout for joy_.\n\n \u2074\u00b2O LORD God, turn not away the face of thine anointed; remember\n the mercies\u00b9 of David thy servant.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _good deeds_ See chapter xxxii. 32.\n\n=42.= _turn not away_] Compare Psalms cxxxii. 10.\n\n_remember the mercies of David_] i.e. _either_ show David\u2019s son the\nmercies thou didst show to David himself (Isaiah lv. 3), _or_ (as\nmargin), remember the good deeds, or \u201cmercies\u201d (so also xxxii. 32),\nwhich David did, and reward his son.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (not in 1 Kings).\n THE SACRIFICES CONSUMED BY FIRE FROM HEAVEN.\n\n \u00b9Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came\n down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the\n sacrifices; and the glory of the LORD filled the house.\n\n=1.= _the fire came down from heaven_] As the discovery of the spot,\napproved by Jehovah, for the site of the Temple was ratified by the\nsign of fire from heaven (see 1 Chronicles xxi. 26, note), so tradition\nor the Chronicler thought that the conclusion of the dedication must\nhave been marked by the same sign of Divine favour.\n\n_consumed the burnt offering_] Compare Leviticus ix. 24; 1 Kings xviii.\n38.\n\n \u00b2And the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD,\n because the glory of the LORD filled the LORD\u2019s house. \u00b3And\n all the children of Israel looked on, when the fire came down,\n and the glory of the LORD was upon the house; and they bowed\n themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and\n worshipped, and gave thanks unto the LORD, _saying_, For he is\n good; for his mercy _endureth_ for ever.\n\n=2.= _the priests could not enter_] Compare v. 14.\n\n\n =4\u201210= (= 1 Kings viii. 62\u201266).\n THE GREAT FEAST OF DEDICATION.\n\n \u2074Then the king and all the people offered sacrifice before the\n LORD. \u2075And king Solomon offered a sacrifice of twenty and two\n thousand oxen, and an hundred and twenty thousand sheep. So the\n king and all the people dedicated the house of God.\n\n=5.= _twenty and two thousand oxen, and an hundred and twenty thousand\nsheep_] These high numbers appear also in 1 Kings.\n\n \u2076And the priests stood, according to their offices; the Levites\n also with instruments of music\u00b9 of the LORD, which David the\n king had made to give thanks unto the LORD, for his mercy\n _endureth_ for ever, when David praised by their ministry: and\n the priests sounded trumpets before them; and all Israel stood.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for the song of the LORD_.\n\n=6.= This verse, which is characteristic of the Chronicler, does not\nappear in 1 Kings.\n\n_instruments of music of the LORD_] margin, =instruments for the song\nof the LORD=. Compare 1 Chronicles xxiii. 5; Amos vi. 5.\n\n_the priests sounded trumpets_] Compare v. 12.\n\n \u2077Moreover Solomon hallowed the middle of the court that was\n before the house of the LORD; for there he offered the burnt\n offerings, and the fat of the peace offerings: because the\n brasen altar which Solomon had made was not able to receive the\n burnt offering, and the meal offering, and the fat.\n\n=7.= _the fat_] Specially mentioned as the choice part of the\nsacrificial victim, a part never to be eaten but always to be burnt.\nLeviticus iii. 16, 17.\n\n_peace offerings_] See note on 1 Chronicles xvi. 1.\n\n_the brasen altar which Solomon had made_] Compare iv. 1; 1 Kings\nix. 25.\n\n_meal offering_] an offering consisting of fine flour mixed with oil\nand frankincense. Compare Leviticus ii. 1\u20127.\n\n \u2078So Solomon held the feast at that time seven days, and all\n Israel with him, a very great congregation, from the entering in\n of Hamath unto the brook of Egypt.\n\n=8.= _the feast_] i.e. the Feast of Tabernacles (see note below on\n_seven days..._, verse 9).\n\n_from the entering in of Hamath_] See note on 1 Chronicles xiii. 5.\n\n_the brook of Egypt_] i.e. not the Nile, but the stream called _Shihor\nof Egypt_ in 1 Chronicles xiii. 5 (see note).\n\n \u2079And on the eighth day they held a solemn assembly\u00b9: for they\n kept the dedication of the altar seven days, and the feast seven\n days.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _closing festival_.\n\n=9.= _a solemn assembly_] margin, =a closing festival=. In the later\nstage of ritual, which is represented in the Priestly Code, an eighth\nday, to be observed as an holy assembly, was added to the Feast of\nTabernacles (Leviticus xxiii. 36; Numbers xxix. 35). The earlier custom\nterminated the festival on the seventh day, and the people went away on\nthe eighth (Deuteronomy xvi. 13, 15).\n\n_seven days, and ... seven days_] Compare 1 Kings viii. 65, 66. The\n_original_ text in Kings agreed with the earlier custom referred to in\nthe previous note, the people being dismissed on the eighth day after\nobserving the seven days Feast of Tabernacles. The evidence of the LXX.\nand also the opening words of verse 66 put it beyond doubt that in the\npresent text of Kings the words _and seven days, even fourteen days_\nare a late addition due probably to the influence of the statement in\nChronicles The Chronicler, or the tradition he follows, did not deem\nit fitting that there should be no special festival for the dedication\nof the Temple. His statement of events is therefore: a seven days\nDedication Feast (from the 8th to the 14th of the month), followed by\nthe Feast of Tabernacles, seven days _plus_ one day of holy assembly\n(from the 15th to the 22nd); and finally on the 23rd of the month the\ndismissal of the people to their homes (see verse 10).\n\n \u00b9\u2070And on the three and twentieth day of the seventh month he\n sent the people away unto their tents, joyful and glad of heart\n for the goodness that the LORD had shewed unto David, and to\n Solomon, and to Israel his people.\n\n=10.= _unto their tents_] The Hebrew word (_\u014dhel_) here approaches\nin meaning the corresponding Arabic word (_ahl_), which denotes\n_household_ or _one\u2019s own people_, e.g. in the phrase _ahlu \u2019linjil_,\n\u201cthe household of the Gospel,\u201d i.e. \u201cthe Christians,\u201d a phrase found\nin the Koran. Compare x. 16, xxv. 22.\n\n\n =11\u201222= (= 1 Kings ix. 1\u20129).\n THE NIGHT VISION IN ANSWER TO SOLOMON\u2019S PRAYER.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Thus Solomon finished the house of the LORD, and the\n king\u2019s house: and all that came into Solomon\u2019s heart to make\n in the house of the LORD, and in his own house, he prosperously\n effected. \u00b9\u00b2And the LORD appeared to Solomon by night, and said\n unto him, I have heard thy prayer, and have chosen this place to\n myself for an house of sacrifice.\n\n=12.= _appeared ... by night_] Compare i. 7.\n\n_an house of sacrifice_] Compare ii. 6.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3If I shut up heaven that there be no rain, or if I command\n the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among\n my people; \u00b9\u2074if my people, which are called by my name\u00b9, shall\n humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from\n their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will\n forgive their sin, and will heal their land. \u00b9\u2075Now mine eyes\n shall be open, and mine ears attent, unto the prayer that is\n made in this place.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _upon whom my name is called_.\n\n=13\u201215.= These verses have no parallel in 1 Kings ix. 1\u20129, but are\nclosely modelled upon the language of Solomon\u2019s prayer in vi. 26\u201228, 40.\n\n=13.= _to devour the land_] LXX. _to devour the trees_; compare Exodus\nx. 15; Joel i. 6, 7.\n\n=15.= _Now ... in this place_] Compare vi. 40.\n\n \u00b9\u2076For now have I chosen and hallowed this house, that my name\n may be there for ever: and mine eyes and mine heart shall be\n there perpetually. \u00b9\u2077And as for thee, if thou wilt walk before\n me as David thy father walked, and do according to all that I\n have commanded thee, and wilt keep my statutes and my judgements;\n \u00b9\u2078then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom, according as\n I covenanted with David thy father, saying, There shall not fail\n thee a man to be ruler in Israel. \u00b9\u2079But if ye turn away, and\n forsake my statutes and my commandments which I have set before\n you, and shall go and serve other gods, and worship them: \u00b2\u2070then\n will I pluck them up by the roots out of my land which I have\n given them; and this house, which I have hallowed for my name,\n will I cast out of my sight, and I will make it a proverb and a\n byword among all peoples.\n\n=16.= _for ever_] Compare xxx. 8.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And this house, which is so high, every one that passeth by it\n shall be astonished, and shall say, Why hath the LORD done thus\n unto this land, and to this house?\n\n=21.= _which is so high_] The Hebrew must be rendered by a past tense,\n=which was high=\u2015\u2015as though the speaker spoke from a later standpoint\nthan the age of Solomon. That interpretation, however, is clumsy; and\nin all probability the reading in Chronicles is simply an attempt to\nimprove an erroneous text in Kings. There the original reading probably\nwas \u201cand this house _shall become ruins_; every one who passes by,\u201d etc.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And they shall answer, Because they forsook the LORD, the God\n of their fathers, which brought them forth out of the land of\n Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and worshipped them, and\n served them: therefore hath he brought all this evil upon them.\n\n=22.= _they shall answer_] Render, =men shall say=.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n\n\n =1\u20126= (compare 1 Kings ix. 10, 11, 17\u201219).\n SOLOMON\u2019S CITIES.\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass at the end of twenty years, wherein\n Solomon had built the house of the LORD, and his own house,\n\n=1.= _twenty years_] Compare 1 Kings vi. 38, vii. 1.\n\n \u00b2that the cities which Huram had given to Solomon, Solomon built\n them, and caused the children of Israel to dwell there.\n\n=2.= _the cities which Huram had given to Solomon_] According to 1\nKings ix. 12, 13 it was Solomon who gave _Huram_ cities. Huram however\nwas not pleased with them (1 Kings ix. 12, 13), and from this fact\nthe English translators of 1611 concluded that Huram rejected them\nand \u201crestored\u201d them. No reconciliation of these different versions is\ntenable; and it is to be supposed that the Chronicler\u2019s tradition is\nunhistorical\u2015\u2015the idea that the wealthy Solomon could not or did not\npurchase what he required from Huram except by parting with a portion\nof the territories of Israel was repugnant, if not incredible, in the\nChronicler\u2019s day.\n\n_built them_] i.e. fortified them.\n\n \u00b3And Solomon went to Hamath-zobah, and prevailed against it.\n\n=3.= _Hamath-zobah_] The two kingdoms of Hamath and Zobah are\ndistinguished from one another (1 Chronicles xviii. 3, 9 = 2 Samuel\nviii. 3, 9), Hamath apparently being north of Zobah. It is probable\nhowever that _Hamath_ as the name of a city belonged to more than one\nplace, and Hamath-zobah may be a southern namesake of the well-known\nHamath the great (Amos vi. 2).\n\n_prevailed against it_] No mention of this campaign is made elsewhere.\nIt may be a genuine tradition preserved only in Chronicles. On the other\nhand, this statement and the reference to the store-cities _built in\nHamath_ (verse 4) may be due to nothing except the mention of _Tadmor\nin the wilderness_ (itself an error, see following note). If Solomon\nbuilt far-off Tadmor, then (the Chronicler thinks) he must also have\nsubdued the region of Hamath.\n\n \u2074And he built Tadmor in the wilderness, and all the store cities,\n which he built in Hamath.\n\n=4.= _Tadmor in the wilderness_] Palmyra (B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 344)\nis meant, a city on an oasis north-east of Damascus half-way between\nDamascus and the Euphrates. Apart from this passage of Chronicles it\nfirst appears in history in B.C. 34, when it was threatened with attack\nby Mark Antony. This silence of history for a thousand years casts\na doubt on the belief that Tadmor (Palmyra) is as old as the time of\nSolomon, and the doubt is strengthened by a reference to the parallel\npassage (1 Kings ix. 18), for there (1)\u00a0the text (_Keth\u012bb_) has \u201cTamar,\u201d\nwith \u201cTadmor\u201d as marginal reading (_\u1e32er\u012b_), and (2)\u00a0Tamar (Tadmor) is\nassociated with Gezer, Beth-horon, and Baalath, cities either in Judah\nor on its borders. Probably therefore the marginal reading \u201cTadmor\u201d\nin 1 Kings is due to the influence of 2 Chronicles, and the text of\n1 Kings (\u201cTamar\u201d) is correct. The city built by Solomon was a Tamar in\nthe south of Judah.\n\n \u2075Also he built Beth-horon the upper, and Beth-horon the nether,\n fenced cities, with walls, gates, and bars;\n\n=5.= _Beth-horon the upper_] Not mentioned in the parallel passage (1\nKings ix. 17) which however has Gezer. The site of Gezer has recently\nbeen explored with extremely interesting results (see e.g. Macalister,\n_Bible Side-lights from the Mound of Gezer_). The Chronicler probably\nomits the name of Gezer, because he had no liking for the tradition\nthat Solomon married a daughter of Pharaoh (a heinous sin in the eyes\nof the Chronicler\u2019s contemporaries), and according to 1 Kings ix. 16\nGezer was presented to Solomon by the Pharaoh as the dowry of his\ndaughter.\n\n \u2076and Baalath, and all the store cities that Solomon had, and all\n the cities for his chariots, and the cities for his horsemen,\n and all that Solomon desired to build for his pleasure in\n Jerusalem, and in Lebanon, and in all the land of his dominion.\n\n=6.= _Baalath_] A city in the tribe of (the southern) Dan not far from\nGezer and Beth-horon (1 Kings ix. 18).\n\n_cities for his chariots_] See note on i. 14.\n\n\n =7\u201210= (= 1 Kings ix. 20\u201223).\n SOLOMON\u2019S TASK-WORKERS.\n\n \u2077As for all the people that were left of the Hittites, and the\n Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites,\n which were not of Israel;\n\n=7.= _Hittites ... Jebusites_] See notes on 1 Chronicles i. 13\u201215.\n\n \u2078of their children that were left after them in the land, whom\n the children of Israel consumed not, of them did Solomon raise a\n levy _of bondservants_, unto this day.\n\n=8.= _consumed not_] But in Kings, _were not able to consume_, a\ndispleasing remark, which the Chronicler therefore softened down.\n\n_a levy_ of bondservants] Compare the notes on ii. 2, 17.\n\n \u2079But of the children of Israel did Solomon make no servants for\n his work; but they were men of war, and chief of his captains,\n and rulers of his chariots and of his horsemen.\n\n=9.= _and chief of his captains_] Read (with 1 Kings ix. 22) =and his\nprinces and his captains=. The statements of this verse must be read\nin connection with 1 Kings v. 13 ff., xii. 4\u00a0ff., whence it appears\nthat, though Solomon did not actually reduce any Israelite to permanent\nslavery, yet he imposed upon his own people a corv\u00e9e which was felt to\nbe very burdensome.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And these were the chief officers of king Solomon, even two\n hundred and fifty, that bare rule over the people.\n\n=10.= _And these were the chief_] After this preface (compare 1 Kings\nix. 23) we expect both here and in 1 Kings a list of these persons;\ncompare 1 Chronicles xi. 10 ff., xii. 1 ff. Possibly the text of 1\nKings suffered at an early date, and the list was missing when the\nChronicler wrote.\n\n_two hundred and fifty_] According to 1 Kings ix. 23, _five hundred and\nfifty_. On the other hand the _under_-overseers are reckoned at three\nthousand six hundred in 2 Chronicles ii. 18 as against three thousand\nthree hundred in 1 Kings v. 16. The total number therefore of overseers\nof all kinds is given both in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles as 3850.\n\n\n =11= (= 1 Kings ix. 24).\n THE HOUSE OF PHARAOH\u2019S DAUGHTER.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And Solomon brought up the daughter of Pharaoh out of the city\n of David unto the house that he had built for her: for he said,\n My wife shall not dwell in the house of David king of Israel,\n because the places\u00b9 are holy, whereunto the ark of the LORD hath\n come.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _they are_.\n\n=11.= _for he said, My wife_, etc.] These words are an addition by the\nChronicler. In 1 Kings iii. 1 it is said simply that Solomon brought\nPharaoh\u2019s daughter into the city of David until his own house was\nfinished.\n\n_My wife shall not dwell_] Render, =No wife of mine shall dwell=.\n\n\n =12\u201216= (compare 1 Kings ix. 25).\n SOLOMON\u2019S ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE TEMPLE WORSHIP.\n\nThis paragraph is in the main an expansion of 1 Kings ix. 25.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Then Solomon offered burnt offerings unto the LORD on the\n altar of the LORD, which he had built before the porch,\n\n=12.= _on the altar of the LORD, which he had built before the porch_]\nThis refers to the great brasen altar of burnt-offering (iv. 1). In 1\nKings the statement is that _Solomon burnt incense upon the altar that\nwas before the LORD_ (referring to the altar of incense; compare Exodus\nxxx. 1\u201210). Such an act, according to the Chronicler, was of the nature\nof trespass, being punished in the case of Uzziah with leprosy (xxvi.\n16), and was therefore not to be attributed to so great a king as\nSolomon.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3even as the duty of every day required, offering according to\n the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons,\n and on the set feasts, three times in the year, _even_ in the\n feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the\n feast of tabernacles.\n\n=13.= _on the sabbaths, and on the new moons_] The writer in Kings\nconfines Solomon\u2019s sacrificial duties to _three times in the year_,\ni.e. on the three great feasts specified at the end of this verse. The\nChronicler adds the weekly and monthly festivals, in conformity with\nthe developed ritual of the Priestly Code.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And he appointed, according to the ordinance of David his\n father, the courses of the priests to their service, and the\n Levites to their charges, to praise, and to minister before the\n priests, as the duty of every day required: the doorkeepers also\n by their courses at every gate: for so had David the man of God\n commanded. \u00b9\u2075And they departed not from the commandment of the\n king unto the priests and Levites concerning any matter, or\n concerning the treasures.\n\n=14.= _of David_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv.\u2012xxvi.\n\n_to praise, and to minister before the priests_] Compare 1 Chronicles\nxxiii. 28.\n\n_David the man of God_] Targum _David the prophet of the Lord_ (a\ncorrect paraphrase). Compare Nehemiah xii. 36.\n\n \u00b9\u2076Now all the work of Solomon was prepared unto the day of the\n foundation of the house of the LORD, and until it was finished.\n _So_ the house of the LORD was perfected.\n\n=16.= _Now all the work of Solomon was prepared_] Render, =So all the\nwork of Solomon was established=.\n\n_unto the day ... was perfected_] LXX. offers a much shorter and\nsmoother text, _from the day on which it was founded until Solomon\nperfected the house of the LORD_. This reading is probably right.\n\n\n =17, 18= (= 1 Kings ix. 26\u201228).\n SOLOMON\u2019S FLEET.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Then went Solomon to Ezion-geber, and to Eloth, on the sea\n shore in the land of Edom.\n\n=17.= _to Ezion-geber, and to Eloth_] In 1 Kings _Ezion-geber which is\nbeside Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea_. Strictly speaking it was at\nthe head of the Gulf of Akaba, the eastern arm of the Red Sea. Compare\nxx. 36 and Deuteronomy ii. 8.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Huram sent him by the hands of his servants ships, and\n servants that had knowledge of the sea; and they came with\n the servants of Solomon to Ophir, and fetched from thence four\n hundred and fifty talents of gold, and brought them to king\n Solomon.\n\n=18.= _sent him by the hands of his servants ships_] The words would\nseem to imply that Huram had ships transported overland from the\nPhoenician coast to the Gulf of Akaba! Either the Chronicler has\nphrased the matter carelessly, or perhaps the text should be altered\nto conform with Kings, where it is merely said that Solomon built ships\nin Ezion-geber\u2015\u2015probably with the help of Huram\u2015\u2015and that Huram helped\nto man them.\n\n_Ophir_] The situation of this oft-mentioned place is not known. It\nhas been identified with some part of the coast (a)\u00a0of India, (b)\u00a0of\nAfrica, (c)\u00a0of Arabia. The last identification is the most probable;\nOphir appears as the name of an Arabian tribe (Genesis x. 29). The\nname is variously written in the LXX. but usually with an initial \u201cS,\u201d\n_Sophir(a)_, which has been supposed to refer to India.\n\n_four hundred and fifty talents_] So LXX., but in 1 Kings \u201cfour\nhundred and twenty\u201d (so Hebrew, in LXX. B \u201ca hundred and twenty\u201d).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER IX.\n\n\n =1\u201212= (= 1 Kings x. 1\u201213).\n THE VISIT OF THE QUEEN OF SHEBA.\n\n \u00b9And when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon,\n she came to prove Solomon with hard questions at Jerusalem, with\n a very great train, and camels that bare spices, and gold in\n abundance, and precious stones: and when she was come to Solomon,\n she communed with him of all that was in her heart. \u00b2And Solomon\n told her all her questions: and there was not any thing hid from\n Solomon which he told her not. \u00b3And when the queen of Sheba had\n seen the wisdom of Solomon, and the house that he had built,\n\n=1.= _Sheba_] An important district in Arabia Felix, the seat of a\nkingdom. See notes on 1 Chronicles i. 9, 32; also Barnes on 1 Kings\nx. 1.\n\n_hard questions_] Hebrew _\u1e25idoth_, \u201cdark sayings\u201d (Proverbs i. 6); the\nsingular is translated \u201criddle\u201d (Judges xiv. 12\u201218).\n\n \u2074and the meat of his table, and the sitting of his servants,\n and the attendance\u00b9 of his ministers, and their apparel; his\n cupbearers also, and their apparel; and his ascent by which he\n went up unto the house of the LORD; there was no more spirit in\n her.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _standing_.\n\n=4.= _and their apparel_] The phrase is repeated probably through an\nerror of transcription; it occurs once only in the parallel place in\n1 Kings.\n\n_his ascent by which he went up_] Render (if the text be sound), =his\nmanner of going up=, i.e. the pomp with which he went up (so Targum);\nbut it is better, with LXX. and Peshit\u1e6da, to read _the burnt offerings\nwhich he used to offer_, a rendering which is right in 1 Kings x. 5\n(compare Revised Version margin). The difference of reading between\nChronicles and 1 Kings in the Hebrew is slight.\n\n \u2075And she said to the king, It was a true report that I heard in\n mine own land of thine acts\u00b9, and of thy wisdom.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _sayings_.\n\n=5.= _of thine acts_] Literally _of thy matters_; the reference is\nquite general.\n\n \u2076Howbeit I believed not their words, until I came, and mine\n eyes had seen it: and, behold, the half of the greatness of\n thy wisdom was not told me: thou exceeded the fame that I heard.\n \u2077Happy are thy men, and happy are these thy servants, which\n stand continually before thee, and hear thy wisdom.\n\n=6.= _the greatness of thy wisdom_] Compare 1 Kings x. 7, \u201cthy wisdom\n_and prosperity_.\u201d\n\n \u2078Blessed be the LORD thy God, which delighted in thee, to set\n thee on his throne, to be king for the LORD thy God: because thy\n God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he\n thee king over them, to do judgement and justice.\n\n=8.= _on his throne_] To the Chronicler the Israelite throne belongs\nto _God_; the visible king occupies it only as a deputy. Compare\n1 Chronicles xxviii. 5, \u201cthe throne of the kingdom of the LORD\u201d; 1\nChronicles xxix. 23, \u201cSolomon sat on the throne of the LORD.\u201d Contrast\n1 Kings x. 9.\n\n \u2079And she gave the king an hundred and twenty talents of gold,\n and spices in great abundance, and precious stones: neither was\n there any such spice as the queen of Sheba gave to king Solomon.\n\n=9.= _an hundred and twenty talents of gold_] A sum so large must be\nregarded rather as _tribute_ than as a complimentary gift.\n\n_any such spice_] i.e. as in 1 Kings \u201csuch _abundance_ of spices.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the servants also of Huram, and the servants of Solomon,\n which brought gold from Ophir, brought algum trees\u00b9 and precious\n stones. \u00b9\u00b9And the king made of the algum trees terraces for\n the house of the LORD, and for the king\u2019s house, and harps and\n psalteries for the singers: and there were none such seen before\n in the land of Judah.\n\n \u00b9 In 1 Kings x. 11, _almug trees_.\n\n=10, 11.= These verses interrupt the connection in Kings as in\nChronicles They are an interpolation. Verse 12 concludes the account\nof the visit of the Queen of Sheba.\n\n=10.= _algum trees_] In 1 Kings \u201c_almug_ trees.\u201d Compare ii. 8 (note).\n\n=11.= _terraces_] Perhaps \u201craised paths.\u201d In 1 Kings x. 12 a different\nHebrew word is used, which may mean \u201crailings\u201d (\u201cpillars,\u201d Authorized\nVersion).\n\n_psalteries_] compare 1 Chronicles xiii. 8 (note).\n\n_in the land of Judah_] Here the Chronicler speaks as a man of his own\nage. We should expect, _land of Israel_.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And king Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all her desire,\n whatsoever she asked, beside that which she had brought unto\n the king. So she turned, and went to her own land, she and her\n servants.\n\n=12.= _beside that which she had brought unto the king_] This means\nthat the king beside returning the queen the value of her present to\nhim, also gave her additional gifts; compare 1 Kings x. 13.\n\n\n =13\u201228= (= 1 Kings x. 14\u201227).\n SOLOMON\u2019S GREATNESS.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was\n six hundred and threescore and six talents of gold;\n\n=13.= _six hundred and threescore and six_] This may be called a\n\u201cround\u201d number, for a system of counting based on the number _six_\nwas known in ancient times, e.g. among the Assyrians. Taken literally,\nthe amount, which would be equal to about \u00a34,000,000 and of course\nof vastly greater purchasing power than the same sum to-day, is\nfantastically large. For similar high figures, compare 1 Chronicles\nxxii. 14 (note).\n\n \u00b9\u2074beside that which the chapmen and merchants brought: and all\n the kings of Arabia and the governors of the country brought\n gold and silver to Solomon.\n\n=14.= _chapmen_] The English word means \u201cmerchant\u201d; compare the verb,\n\u201cto chaffer\u201d and the German \u201cKaufmann.\u201d The Hebrew word means literally\n\u201cthose who go about\u201d as merchants.\n\n_governors_] Hebrew _pa\u1e25oth_ (plural of _pe\u1e25ah_; compare \u201cPasha\u201d), a\nword applied specially to governors of provinces of the Assyrian,\nBabylonian, and Persian empires. Presumably governors outside the land\nof Israel are here meant.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And king Solomon made two hundred targets of beaten gold: six\n hundred _shekels_ of beaten gold went to one target.\n\n=15.= _targets_] Hebrew _\u1e63innah_, a word meaning a large shield;\ncompare 1 Samuel xvii. 7. On the other hand in verse 16 (Hebrew _m\u0101g\u0113n_)\nsmall shields are meant. The English renderings should be transposed so\nas to read \u201cshields\u201d in verse 15 and \u201ctargets\u201d in verse 16.\n\n_six hundred shekels_] About 21 lbs. avoirdupois.\n\n_went to one target_] Render (also in verse 16) =were spread upon one\ntarget=.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And _he made_ three hundred shields of beaten gold; three\n hundred _shekels_ of gold went to one shield: and the king put\n them in the house of the forest of Lebanon. \u00b9\u2077Moreover the king\n made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with pure gold.\n\n =16.= _shields_] See note on verse 15.\n\n_the house of the forest of Lebanon_] So called probably because it\nwas built of cedar of Lebanon (1 Kings vii. 2). It was in Jerusalem and\nseems to have existed as late as the time of Isaiah (Isaiah xxii. 8)\nwhen it was in use as an armoury.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And there were six steps to the throne, with a footstool of\n gold, which were fastened to the throne, and stays\u00b9 on either\n side by the place of the seat, and two lions standing beside\n the stays. \u00b9\u2079And twelve lions stood there on the one side and on\n the other upon the six steps: there was not the like made in any\n kingdom. \u00b2\u2070And all king Solomon\u2019s drinking vessels were of gold,\n and all the vessels of the house of the forest of Lebanon were\n of pure gold: silver was nothing accounted of in the days of\n Solomon.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _arms_ Hebrew _hands_.\n\n=18.= _with a footstool of gold, which were fastened to the throne_]\nA quite different detail takes the place of this in 1 Kings x. 19,\n_and the top of the throne was round behind_. Perhaps both details were\nfound in the original text of Kings.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9For the king had ships that went to Tarshish with the servants\n of Huram: once every three years came the ships of Tarshish,\n bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks. \u00b2\u00b2So\n king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in riches and\n wisdom. \u00b2\u00b3And all the kings of the earth sought the presence of\n Solomon, to hear his wisdom, which God had put in his heart.\n\n=21.= _For the king had ships that went to Tarshish_] Here the\nChronicler misunderstands the parallel passage (1 Kings x. 22, \u201cFor the\nking had at sea _a navy of Tarshish_\u201d). \u201cNavy (or \u2018ships\u2019) of Tarshish\u201d\n(compare Psalms xlviii. 7) is a phrase meaning _large ships fit for\nlong voyages_; i.e. such as were the vessels used by the Phoenicians\nin trading with Tarshish (i.e. Tartessus in Spain). We may well\ncompare the use of the title \u201cIndiaman,\u201d for that term came to be used\ngenerally of large trading vessels besides those actually trading with\nIndia. The merchandise mentioned in this verse doubtless came from the\nEast and not from Tarshish.\n\n_apes_] These animals were much sought after; they appear pictured in\nrelief on the Black Obelisk (in the British Museum; among the tribute\nreceived by Shalmaneser II of Assyria.\n\n \u00b2\u2074And they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and\n vessels of gold, and raiment, armour, and spices, horses, and\n mules, a rate year by year.\n\n=24.= _his present_] i.e. his tribute.\n\n_armour_] A less probable rendering is \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u1f74 (\u201coil of myrrh\u201d) LXX.\n(here and in Kings); also \u201cmyrrh,\u201d Peshit\u1e6da of 2 Chronicles.\n\n\n =25\u201228.= Compare i. 14\u201217.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots,\n and twelve thousand horsemen, which he bestowed in the chariot\n cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.\n\n=25.= _four thousand stalls for horses and chariots_] In the parallel\npassage (1 Kings iv. 26 = v. 6, Hebrew), _forty thousand stalls of\nhorses for his chariots_. Compare also i. 14 (= 1 Kings x. 26) where\n1400 stalls of horses for chariots are ascribed to Solomon. This\nnumber is much more likely to correspond with fact, but that does not\naffect the probability that the Chronicler would find no difficulty in\ncrediting Solomon with possessing 4000 or even 40,000, especially at\nthe close of his reign. The meaning of the word rendered \u201cstalls\u201d is\nquite uncertain: it may mean \u201cpair.\u201d\n\n_twelve thousand horsemen_] So 1 Kings iv. 26 (v. 6, Hebrew); and\n2 Chronicles i. 14 (= 1 Kings x. 26).\n\n_chariot cities_] See note on i. 14.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And he ruled over all the kings from the River even unto the\n land of the Philistines, and to the border of Egypt.\n\n=26.= _from the River_] i.e. the Euphrates.\n\n_even unto the land of the Philistines_] The Philistines, it is implied,\nwere able to maintain their independence.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And the king made silver to be in Jerusalem as stones, and\n cedars made he to be as the sycomore trees that are in the\n lowland, for abundance.\n\n=27.= _cedars_] Rather, =cedar wood=.\n\n_sycomore_] i.e. the fig-mulberry, not now a common tree in Palestine;\ncompare 1 Chronicles xxvii. 28, note.\n\n_the lowland_] (Hebrew _Shephelah_). See G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical\nGeography of the Holy Land_, chapter x. \u201cThe Shephelah,\u201d and the note\non i. 15.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And they brought horses for Solomon out of Egypt, and out of\n all lands.\n\n=28.= _And they brought_, etc.] Compare i. 16, 17.\n\n\n =29\u201231= (= 1 Kings xi. 41\u201243).\n THE EPILOGUE.\n\nAn important section of 1 Kings (xi. 1\u201240) giving an account of\nSolomon\u2019s patronage of idolatry and of the troubles of his reign is\nsignificantly omitted by the Chronicler: see the note on 1 Chronicles\nxxix. 25, p. 168. For the authorities to which the Chronicler appeals\nin these verses, see Introduction \u00a7 5.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they\n not written in the history\u00b9 of Nathan the prophet, and in the\n prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo\u00b2\n the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _words_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Jedai_, or, _Jedo_.\n\n=29.= _the history of Nathan_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxix. 29.\n\n_Ahijah the Shilonite_] 1 Kings xi. 29, xiv. 2 ff.\n\n_Iddo_] Hebrew _Jedai_ or _Jedo_ (probably a misspelling); compare\nxii. 15.\n\n \u00b3\u2070And Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel forty years.\n\n=30.= _forty years_] The number is a round number; compare Judges\niii. 30, v. 31, viii. 28, xiii. 1.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the\n city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his\n stead.\n\n=31.= _slept with his fathers_] This formula is not used of David (1\nChronicles xxix. 28), doubtless because David\u2019s father was not a king!\n\n_in the city of David_] 1 Chronicles xi. 7.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS X.\u2012XXXVI.\n THE HISTORY OF JUDAH FROM REHOBOAM TO THE EXILE.\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n\n\n =1\u201215= (= 1 Kings xii. 1\u201215).\n THE CONFERENCE AT SHECHEM.\n\n \u00b9And Rehoboam went to Shechem: for all Israel were come to\n Shechem to make him king.\n\n=1.= _Shechem_] Chosen by Rehoboam for its central position, for it is\nin the heart of Western Palestine between Mt Ebal and Mt Gerizim.\n\n \u00b2And it came to pass, when Jeroboam the son of Nebat heard of it,\n (for he was in Egypt, whither he had fled from the presence of\n king Solomon,) that Jeroboam returned out of Egypt. \u00b3And they\n sent and called him; and Jeroboam and all Israel came, and they\n spake to Rehoboam, saying,\n\n=2.= _Jeroboam_] For his antecedents (which are not given by the\nChronicler) see 1 Kings xi. 26 ff.\n\n_that Jeroboam returned out of Egypt_] So we should read also in\n1 Kings xii. 2 for \u201cand Jeroboam dwelt in Egypt.\u201d The difference in\nHebrew between the two readings when written without the vowels is\nconfined to one letter, \u05de instead of \u05d1.\n\n \u2074Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore make thou the\n grievous service of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put\n upon us, lighter, and we will serve thee. \u2075And he said unto them,\n Come again unto me after three days. And the people departed.\n\n=4.= _the grievous service of thy father_] The \u201cservice\u201d complained of\nis described (in part) in 1 Kings v. 13, 14 (no parallel in Chronicles).\nCompare viii. 9 (= 1 Kings ix. 22), note.\n\n_and we will serve thee_] The people claim their ancient right to a\nvoice in the appointment of a king; compare 1 Samuel xi. 14, 15 (Saul)\nand 2 Samuel v. 1\u20123 (David).\n\n \u2076And king Rehoboam took counsel with the old men, that had\n stood before Solomon his father while he yet lived, saying,\n What counsel give ye me to return answer to this people?\n\n=6.= _stood before_] Compare Deuteronomy i. 38; 1 Kings xvii. 1. The\nphrase is used to express service, whether rendered to God or to man.\n\n \u2077And they spake unto him, saying, If thou be kind to this people,\n and please them, and speak good words to them, then they will be\n thy servants forever. \u2078But he forsook the counsel of the old men\n which they had given him, and took counsel with the young men\n that were grown up with him, that stood before him. \u2079And he said\n unto them, What counsel give ye, that we may return answer to\n this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke that\n thy father did put upon us lighter? \u00b9\u2070And the young men that\n were grown up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt thou\n say unto the people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father\n made our yoke heavy, but make thou it lighter unto us; thus\n shalt thou say unto them, My little finger is thicker than my\n father\u2019s loins.\n\n=7.= _If thou be kind to this people, and please them_] The Chronicler\nhas softened the forcible words of the parallel passage (1 Kings xii.\n7), \u201cIf thou wilt be a _servant_ unto this people this day, and wilt\n_serve_ them.\u201d The words which were too blunt for Rehoboam were also\ntoo blunt for the Chronicler.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I\n will add to your yoke: my father chastised you with whips, but\n I _will chastise you_ with scorpions. \u00b9\u00b2So Jeroboam and all the\n people came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king bade, saying,\n Come to me again the third day.\n\n=11.= _with whips_] A whip or flail was among the insignia of an\nEgyptian (and perhaps also of an Israelite) king. Compare Erman,\n_Ancient Egypt_, English Translation p. 60 (where an illustration is\ngiven) and p. 63.\n\n_with scorpions_] The expression may be proverbial and metaphorical,\nbut some authorities (e.g. Peshit\u1e6da) take \u201cscorpion\u201d to be the name\nof a particular kind of scourge, the lash of which was provided with\nthorns or hooks.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And the king answered them roughly; and king Rehoboam forsook\n the counsel of the old men, and spake to them after the counsel\n of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, but\n I will add thereto: my father chastised you with whips, but I\n _will chastise you_ with scorpions.\n\n=13.= _answered them roughly_] It was difficult for the son of so\npowerful a king as Solomon to realise that there was any necessity for\na soft answer. Solomon had put down Israelite discontent by driving\nJeroboam into exile in Egypt, and David had put down somewhat easily\nthe movement under Sheba son of Bichri (2 Samuel xx. 1\u201222). Could the\ngood fortune of the house of David fail at this third crisis?\n\n \u00b9\u2075So the king hearkened not unto the people; for it was brought\n about of God, that the LORD might establish his word, which he\n spake by the hand of Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of\n Nebat.\n\n=15.= _Ahijah_] Compare 1 Kings xi. 29\u201239. The incident referred to is\nnot narrated in Chronicles, being assumed to be known.\n\n\n =16\u201219= (= 1 Kings xii. 16\u201219).\n THE REVOLT.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them,\n the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in\n David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: every\n man to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David.\n So all Israel departed unto their tents.\n\n=16.= _What portion have we in David ... the son of Jesse_] The same\nprotest was voiced by Sheba in his brief rebellion against David\n(1 Samuel xx. 1). Contrast the language of the ten tribes after the\ncollapse of Absalom\u2019s rebellion: _We have ten parts in the king_\n(2 Samuel xix. 43).\n\n_to your tents_] See note on vii. 10.\n\n \u00b9\u2077But as for the children of Israel that dwelt in the cities of\n Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them.\n\n=17.= The order is much improved if this verse be read after verse 19.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Then king Rehoboam sent Hadoram, who was over the levy; and\n the children of Israel stoned him with stones, that he died. And\n king Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee\n to Jerusalem. \u00b9\u2079So Israel rebelled against the house of David,\n unto this day.\n\n=18.= _Hadoram_] Called \u201cAdoram\u201d in the parallel passage (1 Kings xii.\n18) and \u201cAdoniram\u201d (1 Kings iv. 6, v. 14 [28, Hebrew]).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XI.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 1 Kings xii. 21\u201224).\n SHEMAIAH FORBIDS CIVIL WAR.\n\nThe Chronicler here omits the elevation of Jeroboam to be king over\nIsrael (1 Kings xii. 20).\n\n \u00b9And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled the\n house of Judah and Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand\n chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against Israel, to\n bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam.\n\n=1.= _an hundred and fourscore thousand_] The number is small compared\nwith the Judean armies mentioned in xiii. 3, xiv. 7, xvii. 14; yet\nit is far greater than is credible. The word rendered _thousand_ may\noriginally have been used to denote a tribal division, thus including\nwomen and children and old men. If so, the actual warriors represented\nby 180 such \u201cthousands\u201d would be about 30,000, a very large number for\nso small a state, yet not impossible. But, however that may be for the\nearly days, there is little or no doubt that the Chronicler understood\nthe word in its strict sense: a literal thousand. See the note on\nxvii. 14.\n\n \u00b2But the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah the man of God,\n saying,\n\n=2.= _Shemaiah_] See xii. 5, 15.\n\n \u00b3Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and\n to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin, saying, \u2074Thus saith the\n LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren:\n return every man to his house; for this thing is of me. So they\n hearkened unto the words of the LORD, and returned from going\n against Jeroboam.\n\n=3.= _to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin_] The Chronicler does not\nhesitate to use the term \u201cIsrael\u201d in speaking of Judah. Thus the\nprinces of the Southern Kingdom are called \u201cthe princes of Israel\u201d\n(xii. 6, xxi. 4), the populace as a whole is called \u201cIsrael\u201d (xii. 1,\nxv. 17), Jehoshaphat and Ahaz are each called \u201cking of Israel\u201d (xxi. 2,\nxxviii. 19), and the sepulchres of the kings at Jerusalem are called\nthe \u201csepulchres of the kings of Israel\u201d (xxviii. 27). _Israel_ in\nChronicles then = the covenant-people. In Kings, on the contrary,\n_Israel_ generally means the Northern Kingdom.\n\n\n =5\u201223.=\n THE PROSPERITY OF REHOBOAM.\n\nThese verses have no corresponding section in 1 Kings On the other hand,\nthe Chronicler omits three important sections of 1 Kings, _viz._ xii.\n25\u201233 (the setting up of the golden calves), xiii. 1\u201232 (the episode of\nthe prophet who cried against the altar in Beth-el) and xiv. 1\u201218 (the\ndeath of the son of Jeroboam).\n\n \u2075And Rehoboam dwelt in Jerusalem, and built cities for defence\n in Judah.\n\n=5.= _built cities for defence_] This does not mean that all these\ncities were then built for the first time; certainly Beth-lehem,\nTekoa, and Hebron were ancient places. Rebuilding, strengthening, and\nfortifying are included in the meaning of the Hebrew verb _b\u0101n\u0101h =\nbuild_. The cities mentioned were situated some in the hill country\nof Judah, some in the Shephelah. It is probable that they were\nstrengthened as a measure of defence against Egypt. Less likely is\nthe suggestion that they were fortified chiefly to prevent or suppress\ninsurrection against Rehoboam in Judah. See also Introduction \u00a7\u00a07,\np. xlviii.\n\n \u2076He built even Beth-lehem, and Etam, and Tekoa,\n\n=6.= _Etam_] Probably represented by some ruins a little to the\nsouth-west of Beth-lehem, by which is a spring called _Ain \u2018At\u0101n_.\nCompare 1 Chronicles iv. 3. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 109.\n\n \u2077and Beth-zur, and Soco, and Adullam,\n\n=7.= _Beth-zur_] Represented by the ruin _Burj \u1e62\u016br_ to the north of\nHebron. Compare Joshua xv. 58. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 112.\n\n_Soco_] The cities hitherto mentioned were situated in the hill\ncountry, but the position of the _Soco_ here mentioned and _Adullam_\nis uncertain. Two places bore the name _Soco_ or _Socoh_, one situated\nin the Shephelah (Joshua xv. 35; 1 Samuel xvii. 1, Revised Version),\nand one in the hill country (\u201cthe mountains,\u201d Joshua xv. 48)\u2015\u2015see note\n1 Chronicles iv. 18. For Adullam compare Joshua xv. 35; 1 Chronicles\nxi. 15 (note on _the cave of Adullam_).\n\n \u2078and Gath, and Mareshah, and Ziph,\n\n=8.= _Gath_] compare 1 Chronicles xviii. 1.\n\n_Mareshah_] In the Shephelah south of the modern _Beit Jibrin_. Compare\nxiv. 9, xx. 37.\n\n_Ziph_] Probably _Tell Zif_ south of Hebron.\n\n \u2079and Adoraim, and Lachish, and Azekah,\n\n=9.= _Adoraim_] The modern _Dora_ west of Hebron.\n\n_Azekah_] In the Shephelah, mentioned along with Socoh in Joshua xv. 35.\n\n \u00b9\u2070and Zorah, and Aijalon, and Hebron, which are in Judah and in\n Benjamin, fenced cities. \u00b9\u00b9And he fortified the strong holds,\n and put captains in them, and store of victual, and oil and wine.\n\n=10.= _Zorah_] Joshua xv. 33 (Revised Version). It was situated in the\nShephelah.\n\n_Aijalon_] The modern _Yalo_, a little north of the Jaffa road about\nmidway between Ramleh and Jerusalem. It is an ancient place mentioned\nin the Tell el-Amarna letters. Compare xxviii. 18 and 1 Chronicles vi.\n69; also Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_ pp. 210\u2012213.\n\n_and in Benjamin_] None of the fifteen cities seems to have been in\nBenjamin. Zorah and Aijalon were in Dan (Joshua xix. 41, 42, Revised\nVersion), while the remaining thirteen were in Judah. Compare verse 5.\n\nBenjamin, in reality, belonged to the Northern Kingdom until, after\nthe fall of Samaria, its territory was included in the Judean kingdom\n(see 1 Kings xii. 20). Later, the idea prevailed that it had been\none with the Southern Kingdom from the beginning\u2015\u2015as appears here,\nand apparently in 1 Kings xi. 31. At any rate the phrase, Judah and\nBenjamin, came to be used as a general expression denoting the Southern\nKingdom. How long any sense of its partial inaccuracy remained is\nuncertain.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And in every several city _he put_ shields and spears, and\n made them exceeding strong. And Judah and Benjamin belonged to\n him.\n\n=12.= _And Judah and Benjamin belonged to him_] If the view, discussed\nin the note on verse 5, that Rehoboam\u2019s military precautions were\ncarried through to suppress or prevent rebellion in Judah, then this\nphrase should be rendered =And so Judah and Benjamin became his=.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And the priests and the Levites that were in all Israel\n resorted to him out of all their border.\n\n=13.= _resorted to him_] Literally _took their stand by him_.\n\n \u00b9\u2074For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and\n came to Judah and Jerusalem: for Jeroboam and his sons cast them\n off, that they should not execute the priest\u2019s office unto the\n LORD:\n\n=14.= _suburbs_] See note on 1 Chronicles v. 16.\n\n_cast them off, that they should not execute the priest\u2019s office unto\nthe LORD_] The point is in the concluding words \u201c_unto the LORD_\u201d\n(i.e. _Jehovah_). Jeroboam did not abandon the worship of Jehovah,\nalthough later generations thought so and could not conceive that the\nfamous \u201ccalves wherewith he made Israel to sin\u201d were images symbolic\nof Jehovah. The Chronicler regards him as having lapsed into gross\nidolatry (see verse 15) and as having ejected all the Levites from his\nkingdom. A less stringent opinion as to his treatment of the priests of\nJehovah is expressed in 1 Kings xii. 31, xiii. 33 where it is not said\nthat Jeroboam rejected the tribe of Levi, but only that he allowed men\nof any tribe to become priests; \u201che ... made priests from among all the\npeople\u201d (Revised Version). Comparison of Kings and Chronicles is here\nvery valuable as an illustration of the care with which the history in\nChronicles has been adapted to indicate that the Northern Kingdom was\nwholly wicked and apostate from the start. The Chronicler\u2019s hostility\nto the North is really directed against the Samaritans: see\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a06.\n\n \u00b9\u2075and he appointed him priests for the high places, and for\n the he-goats\u00b9, and for the calves which he had made. \u00b9\u2076And\n after them, out of all the tribes of Israel, such as set their\n hearts to seek the LORD, the God of Israel, came to Jerusalem\n to sacrifice unto the LORD, the God of their fathers.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _satyrs_ See Leviticus xvii. 7.\n\n=15.= _the he-goats_] The heathen Arabs believed in the existence\nof demons (called _jinn_) having various animal forms and inhabiting\ndeserted places, and this belief was shared by the Hebrews (compare\nIsaiah xiii. 21). In this verse and in Leviticus xvii. 7, the writers\nseem to identify the gods worshipped by the heathen with these demons.\n(Compare W.\u00a0R. Smith, _Religion of the Semites_\u00b2, pp. 120 ff.)\n\n_the calves_] Not previously mentioned in Chronicles; 1 Kings xii. 28.\n\n \u00b9\u2077So they strengthened the kingdom of Judah, and made Rehoboam\n the son of Solomon strong, three years: for they walked three\n years in the way of David and Solomon.\n\n=17.= _three years_] There were three years of prosperity, in the\nfourth year Judah fell away into idolatry, and in the fifth year\nchastisement overtook them by the hand of Shishak (xii. 1\u20123). For the\nsignificance of this, see the note on xii. 14.\n\n_of David and Solomon_] The Chronicler here as elsewhere ignores the\nfall of Solomon. In 1 Kings xi. 4\u20126 an express distinction is made\nbetween the way of David and the way of Solomon.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Rehoboam took him a wife, Mahalath the daughter of\n Jerimoth the son of David, _and of_ Abihail\u00b9 the daughter of\n Eliab the son of Jesse; \u00b9\u2079and she bare him sons; Jeush, and\n Shemariah, and Zaham.\n\n \u00b9 Or, and _Abihail_.\n\n=18.= _Jerimoth_] Nothing is known regarding a son of David of this\nname. He may have been the son of a concubine (1 Chronicles iii. 9).\n\nand of _Abihail_] i.e. Mahalath\u2019s father was Jerimoth, her mother\nAbihail. The Authorized Version \u201cand Abihail\u201d wrongly implies that\nAbihail was, like Mahalath, a wife of Rehoboam.\n\n_Eliab_] David\u2019s eldest brother; 1 Samuel xvi. 6, xvii. 13.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And after her he took Maacah\u00b9 the daughter of Absalom; and\n she bare him Abijah, and Attai, and Ziza, and Shelomith. \u00b2\u00b9And\n Rehoboam loved Maacah the daughter of Absalom above all his\n wives and his concubines: (for he took eighteen wives, and\n threescore concubines, and begat twenty and eight sons and\n threescore daughters.) \u00b2\u00b2And Rehoboam appointed Abijah the son\n of Maacah to be chief, _even_ the prince among his brethren: for\n _he was minded_ to make him king.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xiii. 2, _Micaiah the daughter of Uriel_.\n\n=20.= _Maacah_] Perhaps the _grand_-daughter of Absalom, since she is\ncalled the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah in xiii. 2 (where, with LXX.,\nread \u201cMaacah\u201d for \u201cMichaiah\u201d; and see the note there). According to 2\nSamuel xviii. 18 Absalom had \u201cno son to keep his name in remembrance\u201d\nbut he may have had a daughter who married Uriel and became the mother\nof this Maacah; and further in 2 Samuel xiv. 27 it is said that Absalom\nhad three sons and a daughter named _Tamar_. These sons may all have\ndied young, but perhaps xiv. 27 is another tradition differing from\nxviii. 18.\n\n_Abijah_] Called \u201cAbijam\u201d 1 Kings xv. 1.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And he dealt wisely, and dispersed of all his sons throughout\n all the lands of Judah and Benjamin, unto every fenced city: and\n he gave them victual in abundance. And he sought _for them_ many\n wives\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _sought a multitude of wives_.\n\n=23.= _all the lands_] i.e. the territory of Judah; compare\n1 Chronicles xiii. 2 (margin).\n\n_And he sought_ for them _many wives_] More exactly, as margin, _And\nhe sought a multitude of wives_. It is difficult to say whether or not\nthe Chronicler has Deuteronomy xvii. 17 in his mind and is implicitly\nblaming the king. In any case he goes on in the next verse to say that\nRehoboam forsook the law of the Lord. It is however probable that there\nis a slight error in the Hebrew and that the text ran originally thus,\n_And he took for them_ (i.e. for his sons) _a multitude of wives_.\nRehoboam\u2019s own conjugal affairs have been already described in verse 21.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XII.\n\n\n =1\u201212= (compare 1 Kings xiv. 22, 25\u201228).\n THE INVASION OF SHISHAK.\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass, when the kingdom of Rehoboam was\n established, and he was strong, that he forsook the law of the\n LORD, and all Israel with him.\n\n=1.= _all Israel_] i.e. all the Southern Kingdom; compare note on xi. 3.\nThe details of Judah\u2019s apostasy are given in 1 Kings xiv. 22\u201224.\n\n \u00b2And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that\n Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they\n had trespassed against the LORD,\n\n=2.= _Shishak_] The Egyptian king has commemorated this expedition in\na pictorial inscription on the wall of the temple of Karnak. It appears\nthat the Northern Kingdom suffered as well as the Southern; much spoil\nwas carried off, but no permanent conquest of Canaan was attempted.\n(Breasted, _History of Egypt_, pp. 529 f.)\n\n_because they had trespassed_] A touch characteristic of the Chronicler;\ncompare xiii. 18, xxi. 10, xxiv. 24, xxv. 20, xxvii. 6, xxviii. 19;\nand 1 Chronicles x. 13, 14. The Chronicler sees the working of temporal\nrewards and of temporal punishments everywhere.\n\n \u00b3with twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen:\n and the people were without number that came with him out of\n Egypt; the Lubim, the Sukkiim, and the Ethiopians.\n\n=3.= _with twelve hundred chariots_] The details given in this verse\nare absent from 1 Kings.\n\n_Lubim_] i.e. the Libyans of North Africa. Shishak was a leader of\nLibyan mercenaries. He made himself master of Egypt _circa_ 950 B.C.,\nand is known as the founder of the XXIInd dynasty.\n\n_Sukkiim_] LXX. \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03b3\u03bb\u03bf\u03b4\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, i.e. the cave dwellers of the mountains\nwhich fringe the west coast of the Red Sea. But whether these are\nreally meant here is doubtful.\n\n \u2074And he took the fenced cities which pertained to Judah, and\n came unto Jerusalem.\n\n=4.= _the fenced cities_] Compare xi. 5.\n\n \u2075Now Shemaiah the prophet came to Rehoboam, and to the princes\n of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem because\n of Shishak, and said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Ye have\n forsaken me, therefore have I also left you in the hand of\n Shishak.\n\n=5.= _Now Shemaiah the prophet came_] This intervention of Shemaiah is\nnot mentioned in 1 Kings For an earlier appearance of the prophet see\nxi. 2 ff. = 1 Kings xii. 22 ff.\n\n_have I also left you in the hand_] Rather, =I also have forsaken you\nand delivered you into the hand=.\n\n \u2076Then the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and\n they said, The LORD is righteous.\n\n=6.= _princes of Israel_] Called \u201cprinces of Judah\u201d in verse 5; compare\nnote on xi. 3.\n\n_humbled themselves_] i.e. they fasted and put on sackcloth; compare\n1 Kings xxi. 27, 29.\n\n_The LORD is righteous_] Compare Pharaoh\u2019s confession (Exodus ix. 27),\nand the Psalmist\u2019s address to God, \u201cThat thou mayest be justified\n(literally \u2018mayest be righteous\u2019) when thou speakest, and be clear when\nthou judgest\u201d (Psalms li. 4). The \u201crighteousness\u201d of God is made known\nto man in His judgement, whether the judgement be of condemnation (as\nhere) or of acquittal (as 1 John i. 9, Revised Version).\n\n \u2077And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of\n the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves;\n I will not destroy them: but I will grant them some deliverance\u00b9,\n and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand\n of Shishak.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _deliverance within a little while_ Or, _a few that\n shall escape_.\n\n=7.= _some deliverance_] Render, as margin, =deliverance within a\nlittle while=.\n\n \u2078Nevertheless they shall be his servants; that they may know my\n service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries.\n\n=8.= _that they may know my service_, etc.] i.e. that they may learn\nthe difference between my service and other service.\n\n \u2079So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took\n away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures\n of the king\u2019s house; he took all away: he took away also the\n shields of gold which Solomon had made.\n\n=9.= _he took all away_] Shishak was bought off with a heavy present\nfrom attacking Jerusalem; compare the case of Sennacherib (2 Kings\nxviii. 13\u201216).\n\n_shields_] Rather, =targets=, i.e. small shields; compare note on\nix. 15.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And king Rehoboam made in their stead shields of brass, and\n committed them to the hands of the captains of the guard\u00b9, that\n kept the door of the king\u2019s house. \u00b9\u00b9And it was so, that as oft\n as the king entered into the house of the LORD, the guard came\n and bare them, and brought them back into the guard chamber.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _runners_.\n\n=10.= _the guard_] margin (more literally) =the runners=. These derived\ntheir name from the duty of running before the king\u2019s chariot to clear\nthe way for him; compare 2 Samuel xv. 1; 1 Kings i. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And when he humbled himself, the wrath of the LORD turned from\n him, that he would not destroy him altogether: and moreover in\n Judah there were good things _found_.\n\n=12.= _in Judah were good things_ found] i.e. piety, compare xix. 3.\nThis is said as giving an additional reason for the mercy which God\nhad showed (verse 7). Doubtless it is also intended to emphasise the\nreligious superiority of the South over the North; compare the note on\nxi. 20.\n\n\n =13\u201216= (compare 1 Kings xiv. 21, 29\u201231).\n SUMMARY OF REHOBOAM\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3So king Rehoboam strengthened himself in Jerusalem, and\n reigned: for Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began\n to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the\n city which the LORD had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel,\n to put his name there: and his mother\u2019s name was Naamah the\n Ammonitess.\n\n=13.= _strengthened himself_] See note on i. 1. The immediate reference\nis to a recovery of strength after the departure of Shishak; the\nfurther reference is to xi. 5.\n\n_forty and one years old ... and he reigned seventeen years_] So\nread both the Hebrew and LXX. here and in 1 Kings xiv. 21, but in the\nadditional passage which follows 1 Kings xii. 24 in LXX. (B, not A)\nwe read, _sixteen_ _years old ... and twelve years he reigned_. No\nimportance however can be attached to this variation, for the passage\nwhich contains it is plainly midrashic in character.\n\n_the city which the LORD had chosen_] Though the Ten Tribes were lost\nto the house of David, the Lord kept his oath to David by securing to\nhis seed the possession of the one holy city of Israel.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And he did that which was evil, because he set not his heart\n to seek the LORD.\n\n=14.= _he set not his heart_] The phrase implies _steady purpose_. The\nChronicler concludes that Rehoboam must be classed as a king who was\ngood but not entirely so. The considerations which chiefly influenced\nhim in determining the character of this reign were perhaps two: on\nthe one hand the invasion of Shishak was felt to be a fixed point, a\ndisaster only to be accounted for in the Chronicler\u2019s view by _some_\nfalling away from assiduous worship of Jehovah; and on the other hand\nit seemed incredible that the second direct descendant of David on the\nthrone of Israel should have been seriously corrupt. The situation was\nmet by representing Rehoboam as having been three years faithful (and\ntherefore prosperous), and one year faithless (and therefore assailed\nby Shishak in the fifth year). The favourable aspect of his reign was\nfurther emphasised by the statement of verse 16, and by the suppression\nof the three damaging passages in Kings, referred to in the head-note\nto xi. 5\u201223. It is very obvious that the resultant picture of the king\nis much less true to historical reality than the account in Kings;\nbut it serves excellently to illustrate the Chronicler\u2019s contention\nthat virtue prospers and vice is punished. And once more we may insist\nthat the value of this writer for us lies supremely in the energy and\nthe conviction with which he seeks to drive home this great moral and\nspiritual belief.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written\n in the histories\u00b9 of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer,\n after the manner of genealogies\u00b2? And there were wars between\n Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually. \u00b9\u2076And Rehoboam slept with his\n fathers, and was buried in the city of David: and Abijah his son\n reigned in his stead.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _words_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _in reckoning the genealogies_.\n\n=15.= _in the histories of ..._] See Introduction \u00a7\u00a05.\n\n_Iddo_] compare xiii. 22, and see note on ix. 29.\n\n_after the manner of genealogies_] margin _in reckoning the\ngenealogies_; but literally \u201c_to enrol themselves_.\u201d This most obscure\nphrase is perhaps a meaningless fragment due to textual corruption.\nAnother suggestion is that it has been misplaced and should be read at\nthe end of xi. 16.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIII.\n\n\n =1, 2= (= 1 Kings xv. 1, 2).\n ABIJAH SUCCEEDS.\n\n \u00b9In the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam began Abijah to reign\n over Judah.\n\n=1.= _Abijah_] Called _Abijam_ in 1 Kings (LXX. \u1f08\u03b2\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd, i.e. Abijahu).\n\n \u00b2Three years reigned he in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name\n was Micaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war\n between Abijah and Jeroboam.\n\n=2.= _Micaiah_] Read with LXX., =Maacah=; compare note on xi. 20.\nTorrey, however, (_Ezra Studies_, p. 217) suggests that some words\nhave fallen out of the text through similarity of ending. He would read\n\u201cAnd his mother\u2019s name was Maacah Maacah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah\u201d: the inconsistency as to\nMaacah\u2019s parentage between this verse and xi. 20 would disappear, and\nthe suggestion that Maacah was _grand_-daughter of Absalom (see xi. 20,\nnote) would be unnecessary.\n\n\n =3\u201220= (no parallel in 1 Kings).\n THE BATTLE OF ZEMARAIM.\n\nThe account of Abijah\u2019s astonishing triumph over the host of Jeroboam\nshould be compared with xiv. 9\u201215 (Asa\u2019s victory) and xx. 1\u201230\n(Jehoshaphat\u2019s victory; see Introduction pp. xlix f.), passages\nwhich like the present are nowhere else recorded, and are essentially\nunhistorical. No reliance can be placed on the high numbers of the\nopposing armies (verse 3), on the pious speech ascribed to king\nAbijah which neatly and forcibly expresses the ecclesiastical view of\nschismatic Israel held by the Chronicler and his school (verses 4\u201212),\nor on the appalling carnage wrought in the Israelite army (verse 17).\nThe tale, in fact, is of a markedly midrashic character, i.e. a\nnarrative intended to edify and not to be treated as serious history.\nBut in all such cases it is fair to distinguish between the form\nand the substance: at least the bare substance of the tale. Thus in\nthe present instance the judgement stated above does not preclude\nthe possibility that war took place between Abijah and Jeroboam,\nand that the former gained a useful success over the more powerful\nNorthern Kingdom. The absence from Kings of any mention of such\nvictory is a serious objection; but it is not fatal, unless we take\nthe view\u2015\u2015objected to in the Introduction \u00a7\u00a05\u2015\u2015that the Chronicler\nhad absolutely no sources, oral or written, of the faintest value\nfor pre-exilic days apart from the canonical writings. Yet it must\nbe admitted that it would be not unnatural to the workings of the\nChronicler\u2019s mind to infer that some signal success must have rewarded\nso near a descendant of David if only to compensate in part for\nRehoboam\u2019s disastrous reign and at any rate to punish the glaring\niniquity of a schismatic and idolatrous Israel. Judging from the\nbrief account of Abijah in 1 Kings xv. 1\u20127, we may conclude that the\ncontinued hostility between North and South was a fact, but that it\nis extremely improbable there was a reliable tradition (if any at all)\nregarding a _great_ Judean victory in his reign: see note on _Zemaraim_\nbelow.\n\n \u00b3And Abijah joined battle with an army of valiant men of war,\n even four hundred thousand chosen men: and Jeroboam set the\n battle in array against him with eight hundred thousand chosen\n men, who were mighty men of valour.\n\n=3.= _four hundred thousand ... eight hundred thousand_] The numbers\nare of course vastly in excess of any historic possibility; compare the\nnotes on xi. 1, xiv. 8, and especially that on xvii. 14.\n\n \u2074And Abijah stood up upon mount Zemaraim, which is in the hill\n country of Ephraim, and said, Hear me, O Jeroboam and all Israel;\n\n=4.= _Abijah stood up_] Abijah attempts conference before beginning\ncivil war, not simply because his was the weaker side numerically but\nbecause he had a telling appeal to make to the revolted tribes (verses\n8, 12). Jeroboam breaks off the conference after using it to cover his\nstratagem (verse 13).\n\n_Zemaraim_] A Zemaraim is mentioned in Joshua xviii. 22 as one of\nthe cities of _Benjamin_, whereas here Mount Zemaraim is assigned to\n_Ephraim_. The natural inference is that the battle took place on the\nborder of the two kingdoms. The tradition that a battle took place here\nbetween North and South, and perhaps between Abijah and Jeroboam, may\nbe correct.\n\n \u2075ought ye not to know that the LORD, the God of Israel, gave\n the kingdom over Israel to David for ever, even to him and to\n his sons by a covenant of salt? \u2076Yet Jeroboam the son of Nebat,\n the servant of Solomon the son of David, rose up, and rebelled\n against his lord.\n\n=5.= _a covenant of salt_] Salt was necessary for the efficacy of\na sacrifice (Leviticus ii. 13), so that _Covenant of salt_ became a\nphrase for a _sure_ covenant (Numbers xviii. 19). The sacredness of the\nbond which is acknowledged among the Arabs between two persons who have\n\u201ceaten salt\u201d together as host and guest is common knowledge. It is not,\nhowever, necessary that salt should be taken; any food, e.g. milk, will\nserve (W.\u00a0R. Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, p. 270).\n\n \u2077And there were gathered unto him vain men, sons of Belial\u00b9,\n which strengthened themselves against Rehoboam the son of\n Solomon, when Rehoboam was young and tenderhearted, and could\n not withstand them. \u2078And now ye think to withstand the kingdom\n of the LORD in the hand of the sons of David; and ye be a\n great multitude, and there are with you the golden calves which\n Jeroboam made you for gods.\n\n \u00b9 That is, _worthlessness_.\n\n=7.= _sons of Belial_] margin _sons of worthlessness_. The general\nsense \u201cworthless persons\u201d or rather \u201cvile scoundrels\u201d (for gross\nwickedness is implied) is clear, but the precise meaning of _Belial_\nhas not yet been determined. The etymology of the word is quite obscure,\nsee _Encyclopedia Biblia_ I. 525 f.\n\n_young_] Literally _a child_. If this word is to be literally\nunderstood, the statement made is inconsistent with xii. 13, where\nit is said that Rehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to\nreign. It is possible, however, that the word is used metaphorically\nto describe one who was _young_ (as indeed his conduct showed) in\nexperience of government; so Solomon (1 Kings iii. 7) calls himself a\n_little child_, by which he meant simply to express his consciousness\nof the smallness of his own ability when compared with the greatness of\nthe task which lay before him, compare 1 Chronicles xxix. 1. A similar\ndifficulty arises in regard to the age of Solomon, see _Encyclopedia\nBritannica_ s.v. _Solomon_.\n\n_tenderhearted_] i.e., according to Hebrew phraseology, _weak in\nunderstanding_, the heart being considered to be the seat of the mind.\nOr we may translate the Hebrew phrase as in Deuteronomy xx. 8,\n_fainthearted_.\n\n \u2079Have ye not driven out the priests of the LORD, the sons of\n Aaron, and the Levites, and have made you priests after the\n manner of the peoples of _other_ lands? so that whosoever cometh\n to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, the\n same may be a priest of _them that are_ no gods.\n\n=9.= _driven out_] see note on xi. 14.\n\n_after the manner of the peoples of other lands_] i.e. who, unlike\nIsrael, had no special class from which alone their priests were taken.\nPossibly, following the LXX., we should read =from the people= of the\nland (i.e. anyone who chose to apply, whether a Levite or not), compare\n1 Kings xii. 31, xiii. 33.\n\n_to consecrate himself_] Literally _to fill his hand_. Moses is\ndirected (Exodus xxix. 1 ff.) to ordain Aaron and his sons priests by\nthree ceremonies: (1)\u00a0by anointing them, (2)\u00a0by filling their hands,\ni.e. by presenting them with victims upon which they laid their hands,\n(3)\u00a0by hallowing them, i.e. by sprinkling some of the blood of the\nvictim upon them.\n\n_a young bullock and seven rams_] Aaronic priests were consecrated with\na young bullock and _two_ rams (Exodus xxix. 1).\n\n \u00b9\u2070But as for us, the LORD is our God, and we have not forsaken\n him; and _we have_ priests ministering unto the LORD, the sons\n of Aaron, and the Levites in their work:\n\n=10.= _in their work_] sc. _ministering unto the LORD_, as above.\nPart of the ideal of the Priestly Code was that the Levites should be\nrestricted to the duty of helping the priests, and should be prevented\nfrom executing priestly functions themselves. With this ideal the\nChronicler plainly sympathised, but it could not always be realised.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9and they burn unto the LORD every morning and every evening\n burnt offerings and sweet incense: the shewbread also _set they_\n in order upon the pure table; and the candlestick of gold with\n the lamps thereof, to burn every evening: for we keep the charge\n of the LORD our God; but ye have forsaken him.\n\n=11.= _every morning and every evening_] Exodus xxix. 38\u201242.\n\n_sweet incense_] Exodus xxx. 7.\n\n_the shewbread also_ set they _in order_] Literally _and an ordering of\nbread_ [they set in order]. The Hebrew phrase used here for \u201cshewbread\u201d\nsignifies bread arranged as for an offering. Another term is \u201cbread of\nthe presence,\u201d i.e. bread set forth continually before the Lord (Exodus\nxxv. 30). See 1 Chronicles ix. 32 (note).\n\n_the candlestick_] Exodus xxv. 31 ff., xl. 24, 25.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And, behold, God is with us at our head, and his priests with\n the trumpets of alarm to sound an alarm against you. O children\n of Israel, fight ye not against the LORD, the God of your\n fathers; for ye shall not prosper.\n\n=12.= _the trumpets of alarm_] (Numbers x. 9). Abijah here threatens\nhis opponents with a _jih\u0101d_ or holy war.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3But Jeroboam caused an ambushment to come about behind them:\n so they were before Judah, and the ambushment was behind them.\n \u00b9\u2074And when Judah looked back, behold, the battle was before\n and behind them: and they cried unto the LORD, and the priests\n sounded with the trumpets.\n\n=13.= _Jeroboam caused an ambushment_] While Abijah was endeavouring\nto shake the fidelity of the Northern army, the Northern leader secures\na tactical advantage. The greater the advantages of the Israelites and\nthe more disastrous the position ascribed to the army of Judah, so much\nthe more glorious is the victory which Judah achieves by its reliance\non Jehovah.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Then the men of Judah gave a shout: and as the men of Judah\n shouted, it came to pass, that God smote Jeroboam and all Israel\n before Abijah and Judah. \u00b9\u2076And the children of Israel fled\n before Judah: and God delivered them into their hand.\n\n=15.= _gave a shout_] This shout had the character of a religious\nfunction; compare Joshua vi. 10, 16; Judges vii. 20, where the same\nHebrew word is used.\n\n_God smote Jeroboam_] Compare xiv. 12. Supernatural aid secures the\nvictory.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And Abijah and his people slew them with a great slaughter: so\n there fell down slain of Israel five hundred thousand chosen men.\n\n=17.= The Chronicler has little or no interest in military matters as\nsuch, and is heedless of probability so far as the numbers he mentions\nare concerned. They must be sufficiently immense to enhance the power\nof Jehovah and to convey the impression that the days of old were\nmighty days. Comparison has been made with the phrase \u201ca hundred and\ntwenty thousand _in one day_\u201d (xxviii. 6), and from the absence of the\nwords \u201cin one day,\u201d it has been argued that the present passage refers\nto the losses of the whole campaign. Even so the figure, 500,000, is an\nimmense exaggeration.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Thus the children of Israel were brought under at that time,\n and the children of Judah prevailed, because they relied upon\n the LORD, the God of their fathers.\n\n=18.= _because they relied_] Compare note on xii. 2.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And Abijah pursued after Jeroboam, and took cities from him,\n Beth-el with the towns thereof, and Jeshanah with the towns\n thereof,\n\n=19.= _Beth-el_] Beth-el was apparently subsequently recovered by the\nNorthern Kingdom; compare 2 Kings x. 29. But, as it is very doubtful\nwhether this section has any historical basis (see the head-note, xiii.\n3), Beth-el may never have come under the rule of Abijah as is here\nstated. Nothing is said, be it noted, of the capture of the golden calf.\n\n_Jeshanah_] Nothing is certainly known of this place, which is\nmentioned here only. It has been identified with _Ain S\u012bnia_, a little\nto the north of Beth-el.\n\n_Ephron_] so the _Keth\u012bb_, whereas the Authorized Version following the\n_\u1e32er\u012b_ has =Ephrain=. _Ephrain_ is a later form of the name _Ephron_,\nas _Shamrain_ (Ezra iv. 10, 17) is of _Shomron_ (Samaria). The place\nhas been identified with e\u1e6d-\u1e6caiyebeh, a place south-east of Ain S\u012bnia\nand north-east of Beitin (Beth-el). It was probably the _city called\nEphraim_, to which our Lord retired after the raising of Lazarus (John\nxi. 54).\n\n \u00b2\u2070and Ephron\u00b9 with the towns thereof. Neither did Jeroboam\n recover strength again in the days of Abijah: and the LORD smote\n him, and he died.\n\n \u00b9 Another reading is, _Ephrain_.\n\n=20.= _the LORD smote him, and he died_] The same phrase is used of the\ndeath of Nabal (1 Samuel xxv. 38); it implies suddenness or some other\nunusual circumstance (compare Acts xii. 23, the death of Herod Agrippa).\n1 Kings xiv. 20 says simply _Jeroboam ... slept with his fathers_.\n\n\n =21, 22.=\n THE EPILOGUE OF ABIJAH\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9But Abijah waxed mighty, and took unto himself fourteen wives,\n and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters.\n\n=21.= _fourteen wives_] The many wives are mentioned here as a symbol\nof the wealth and state of Abijah.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And the rest of the acts of Abijah, and his ways, and his\n sayings, are written in the commentary of the prophet Iddo.\n\n=22.= _his ways_] The Chronicler takes a much more favourable view\nof Abijah than Kings, where it is said of him that \u201che walked in\nall the sins of his father...\u201d (1 Kings xv. 3), and received favour\nfrom Jehovah only on account of the merits of David. Evidently the\nChronicler deemed it fitting to fasten on the fact of the favour,\nperhaps because he felt it imperative that Jeroboam should receive from\nthe next king of Judah the punishment for his sins which Rehoboam could\nnot inflict.\n\n_in the commentary_] Hebrew _Midrash_. See Introduction, \u00a7\u00a05, p. xxxi.\n\n_Iddo_] See note on ix. 29.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIV.\n\n\n =1\u20125= (compare 1 Kings xv. 9\u201215).\n THE RELIGIOUS POLICY OF ASA.\n\nIn Kings the reign of Asa is reviewed with entire approval, according\nto Chronicles his conduct was marred only by the lack of faith\nmanifested in his reliance on the king of Syria (see xvi. 1\u201210), and\nin his recourse to physicians at the close of his reign (xvi. 12).\n\n \u00b9So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the\n city of David, and Asa his son reigned in his stead: in his days\n the land was quiet ten years. \u00b2And Asa did that which was good\n and right in the eyes of the LORD his God:\n\n=1.= _ten years_] These _ten_ years of rest are naturally to be\nassigned to the beginning of Asa\u2019s reign; later on there was a rest\nof _twenty_ years (compare xv. 10 with xv. 19). The number _ten_ here\nmakes a discrepancy with 1 Kings, for Baasha became king of Israel\nin the _third_ year of Asa (1 Kings xv. 28, 33), and \u201cthere was war\nbetween Asa and Baasha all their days\u201d (1 Kings xv. verse 32). If,\nhowever, we allow some latitude to the language both of 1 Kings and of\nChronicles, the discrepancy becomes unimportant.\n\n \u00b3for he took away the strange altars, and the high places,\n and brake down the pillars\u00b9, and hewed down the Asherim; \u2074and\n commanded Judah to seek the LORD, the God of their fathers, and\n to do the law and the commandment.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _obelisks_.\n\n=3.= _he took away_] In 1 Kings xv. 12, 13 he is said to have put\naway the sodomites, and all the idols that his fathers had made; and\nalso \u201cthe abominable image\u201d which Maacah, his mother, had made. These\nremarks are here ignored by the Chronicler, probably because they\nwould be out of harmony with the comparatively pious character he has\nascribed to Asa\u2019s predecessors, Rehoboam and Abijah. They are given,\nhowever, in xv. 16, 17, where see note.\n\n_the strange altars_] i.e. altars belonging to gods other than Jehovah.\n\n_and the high places_] a direct contradiction of 1 Kings xv. 14, where\nit is said \u201cBut the high places were not taken away: nevertheless the\nheart of Asa was perfect with the LORD all his days.\u201d This remarkable\ncontrast affords a vivid illustration of the different standpoints of\nKings and Chronicles In Kings the removal of the high-places is the\ngreat reform of later days effected by Hezekiah (1 Kings xviii. 4, 22),\nby Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 8). To the Chronicler, who believed that\nthe law centralising the worship of Jehovah in Jerusalem was in force\nfrom the Mosaic age, the abolition of the high-places was felt to be\na minimum of reform and must surely have been carried out by any king\nwith a claim to piety. See also the note on xv. 17.\n\n_the pillars_] LXX. \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2. The \u201cpillar\u201d or \u201cobelisk,\u201d Hebrew\n_Ma\u1e63\u1e63\u0113b\u0101h_, was a monolith standing by an altar as a symbol of the\ngod worshipped at the altar. In later days an image took the place of\nthe pillar, i.e. the mere symbol was succeeded by the likeness of the\ngod. (W.\u00a0R. Smith, _Religion of the Semites\u00b2_, pp. 203 ff., and for\nillustrations of those recently discovered at Gezer see Macalister,\n_Bible Side-lights_, or Driver, _Modern Research as illustrating the\nBible_, p. 63.)\n\n_and hewed down the Asherim_] An _Ash\u0113rah_ (plural _Ash\u0113rim_ and\n_Ash\u0113roth_) was a wooden pole planted beside an altar as the symbol\nof a deity. It appears to have been a survival of tree-worship, as the\n_Ma\u1e63\u1e63\u0113b\u0101h_ was a survival of stone-worship. The _Ash\u0113rah_ of itself did\nnot represent any particular deity, but it could be carved to bear the\nsymbol of any special god or goddess, e.g. of Ashtarte. (W.\u00a0R. Smith,\n_Religion of the Semites_\u00b2, pp. 186 ff.) Probably the term _Ash\u0113rah_\nwas used in reference to the living sacred trees, which are still\ncommon in Palestine: see the present writer\u2019s edition of the Mishna\ntractate, _\u2018Aboda Zara_, pp. 60 f.\n\n \u2075Also he took away out of all the cities of Judah the high\n places and the sun-images: and the kingdom was quiet before him.\n\n=5.= _the sun-images_] Compare xxxiv. 4; Isaiah xvii. 8, xxvii. 9.\nThe Hebrew word (\u201c\u1e25amman\u201d) is of uncertain meaning and the supposed\nconnection with _heat_ or the _sun_ is unsatisfactory. On the whole\nthe evidence points to the conclusion that the \u201c\u1e25amman\u201d was a stone\npillar associated with the altar, and much the same as the \u201cMa\u1e63\u1e63\u0113b\u0101h,\u201d\nthe difference perhaps being that the former was artificially shaped,\nthe latter was of natural stone (see article _Baal_ in Hastings\u2019\n_Dictionary of Religion and Ethics_, pp. 287, 288).\n\n\n =6\u20128.=\n DEFENSIVE MEASURES OF ASA.\n\nFrom xvi. 1\u20126 = 1 Kings xv. 17\u201222, it appears that there was a strong\nand probably a reliable tradition ascribing to Asa activity in building\ndefensive townships in Judah. It is likely that the present verses with\ntheir vague reference to strongly built cities with no mention of their\nnumber or names are only an expansion of the more precise references\nin xvi. 6. The Chronicler has assigned the narrative given in xvi. 1\u20126\n(the war with Baasha) to the close of Asa\u2019s reign (for reasons noted\nunder xvi. 1), and he obviously _wanted_ something to occupy the ten\nyears of peace with which\u2015\u2015according to his story\u2015\u2015the reign of Asa\nopened. This is conveniently found in a general allusion to building\nand fortification.\n\n \u2076And he built fenced cities in Judah: for the land was quiet,\n and he had no war in those years; because the LORD had given him\n rest. \u2077For he said unto Judah, Let us build these cities, and\n make about them walls, and towers, gates, and bars; the land is\n yet before us, because we have sought the LORD our God; we have\n sought him, and he hath given us rest on every side. So they\n built and prospered. \u2078And Asa had an army that bare bucklers and\n spears, out of Judah three hundred thousand; and out of Benjamin,\n that bare shields and drew bows, two hundred and fourscore\n thousand: all these were mighty men of valour.\n\n=8.= _that bare bucklers and spears ... that bare shields and drew\nbows_] LXX., \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd (= \u1f41\u03c0\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd) \u03b1\u1f30\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03c1\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n... \u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03be\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. The Chronicler divides Asa\u2019s army into the\nheavy-armed men belonging to Judah and the light-armed bowmen belonging\nto Benjamin. Asa apparently had no chariots. \u201cBucklers\u201d and \u201cshields\u201d\nshould be transposed as in ix. 15.\n\n_of Judah three hundred thousand ... of Benjamin ... two hundred and\nfourscore thousand_] The total is 580,000. Under Asa\u2019s successor,\nJehoshaphat, the numbers are (xvii. 14\u201218), Judah 780,000, Benjamin\n380,000, making a total of 1,160,000, i.e. twice the total given above.\nThe moral which the Chronicler would enforce by these figures seems\nto be that Judah was strong in the early days of Asa, while Asa showed\nfaith in God, and that it became still stronger under his really\nreligious successor, Jehoshaphat. Regarding the exaggeration of these\nfigures, see the notes on xi. 1, and xvii. 14.\n\n\n =9\u201215= (no parallel in Kings).\n ASA\u2019S VICTORY OVER ZERAH: THE BATTLE OF MARESHAH.\n\nThe present passage has much the same midrashic character as the\naccount of Abijah\u2019s victory related in the previous chapter, and some\nscholars consider that the story of the raid and defeat of Zerah has\nno basis in fact. It is, however, more probable that it originates in\na genuine tradition of the repulse of some Egyptian, or rather Arabian\n(see note, verse 9), inroad, not necessarily, however, in the time of\nAsa: compare the Introduction \u00a7\u00a07, p. l.\n\n \u2079And there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an\n army of a thousand thousand, and three hundred chariots; and he\n came unto Mareshah.\n\n=9.= _against them_] We should expect either _against him_ (i.e. Asa)\nor _against Judah_. Perhaps this account has been torn out from some\nolder document without regard to the context, so that the reference of\n_them_ is lost. Compare notes on verses 12, 13, 14.\n\n_Zerah the Ethiopian_] Rather, =Zerah the Cushite= (\u201cman of Cush\u201d).\nCush (Genesis x. 7) was the ancestor of certain Arabian tribes,\nincluding Saba, see 1 Chronicles i. 9; and Arabians and Cushites\n(\u201cEthiopians\u201d Authorized Version, also Revised Version) are mentioned\nas neighbours (2 Chronicles xxi. 16). It is therefore highly probable\nthat the leader of the inroad was an Arabian (Sabean) and not an\nEthiopian. (Compare S.\u00a0A. Cook in _Expository Times_ June, 1906, p.\n541, against Petrie, _History of Egypt._) _Zerah_ perhaps represents\n_Dhirr\u012bh_ (_Zirr\u012bh_), a title (meaning \u201cthe magnificent\u201d) of several\nof the oldest princes of Saba. The tradition may therefore be brought\ninto connection with the many indications in Chronicles of Arabian\nincursions on the southern borders of Judah. Mareshah, where the battle\nwas fought (verse 9), was one of the ancient seats of the Calebites\nfrom which they were driven northwards (compare 1 Chronicles ii.).\nThose who prefer to regard Cushite as = Ethiopian\u2015\u2015see 1 Chronicles\ni. 8\u2015\u2015and Zerah as an Egyptian king, have to suppose that \u201cEthiopian\u201d\nis applied to him loosely and somewhat ignorantly; and further, as\nno king of Egypt is so named, that Zerah must denote Osorkon I or II,\nor perhaps be the name of a general of Osorkon. From xvi. 8 (see the\nnote on _Lubim_) it would seem probable that the _Chronicler_ believed\nZerah\u2019s host to be an Egyptian force.\n\n_a thousand thousand_] An inroad of the \u201cchildren of the East\u201d was\nformidable from sheer weight of numbers. We may gather from xvi. 8 that\nthe original assailants were joined by other hordes as they drew near\nthe border of Judah. The number _a thousand thousand_ is probably meant\nto signify that the host was too great to number; it is, of course, not\nto be taken literally.\n\n_three hundred chariots_] The chariots, though comparatively few, are\nmentioned, (1)\u00a0perhaps because Asa himself had _none_, (2)\u00a0perhaps also\nbecause they represent an Egyptian contingent. This suggestion receives\nsupport from xvi. 8, where the Lubim (compare xii. 3) are associated\nwith the Cushites in the invasion. The cowardly foreign policy of\nEgypt may have led her on this occasion to defend her own borders from\nthe barbarian hordes by encouraging them to invade her neighbour\u2019s\nterritories.\n\nThe reading _three hundred_ is supported by the LXX. and is probably\nright. The reading of the Peshit\u1e6da, \u201cthirty thousand,\u201d and the wording\nof xvi. 8, \u201cwith exceeding many chariots and horsemen,\u201d seem like a\nretouching of the narrative to make the number of the chariots and\nhorsemen correspond with the number of the whole host.\n\n_Mareshah_] See note on xi. 8.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Then Asa went out to meet him, and they set the battle in\n array in the valley of Zephathah at Mareshah. \u00b9\u00b9And Asa cried\n unto the LORD his God, and said, LORD, there is none\u00b9 beside\u00b2\n thee to help, between the mighty and him that hath no strength:\n help us, O LORD our God; for we rely on thee, and in thy name\n are we come against this multitude. O LORD, thou art our God;\n let not man prevail against thee.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _there is no difference with thee to help, whether the\n mighty or him &c._\n\n \u00b2 Or, _like_.\n\n=10.= _in the valley_] Probably the valley in which Beit-Jibrin now\nstands, one of several valleys giving access from the Shephelah into\ncentral Judah (G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_,\npp. 230\u2012233). In such a place a large force might easily be discomfited\nby a few resolute men (compare 2 Samuel xvii. 9, 10).\n\n_of Zephathah at Mareshah_] Render with LXX., =north of Mareshah=\n(reading _\u1e62aphonah_ for _Zephathah_). No valley or town called\n\u201cZephathah\u201d is known.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2So the LORD smote the Ethiopians before Asa, and before Judah;\n and the Ethiopians fled.\n\n=12.= _the LORD smote_] Compare xiii. 15. The use of The Name,\n_Jehovah_ (translated THE LORD), instead of the general word \u201cGod\u201d here\nand in verses 13, 14 is in favour of the view that the Chronicler took\nthis account from some earlier document, perhaps a midrashic history of\nJudah (Introduction \u00a7\u00a05, p. xxxvi).\n\n_the Ethiopians_] Rather, =the Cushites=.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And Asa and the people that were with him pursued them unto\n Gerar: and there fell of the Ethiopians so many\u00b9 that they could\n not recover themselves; for they were destroyed\u00b2 before the LORD,\n and before his host; and they carried away very much booty.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _so that none remained alive_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _broken_.\n\n=13.= _Gerar_] Identified with _Jer\u0101r_, ruins three hours south of Gaza;\ncompare 1 Chronicles iv. 39 (read \u201cGerar,\u201d LXX. \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1),\n\n_so many that they could not recover themselves_] Or perhaps, as margin,\n=so that none remained alive=.\n\n_very much booty_] The phrase used belongs to a style earlier than that\nof the Chronicler. Compare note on verse 9 (_against them_).\n\n \u00b9\u2074And they smote all the cities round about Gerar; for the fear\n of the LORD\u00b9 came upon them: and they spoiled all the cities;\n for there was much spoil in them.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _a terror from the LORD_.\n\n=14.= _the fear of the LORD_] The Chroniclers own phrase is \u201cthe fear\nof God\u201d (xx. 29).\n\n_much spoil_] Again we miss a favourite expression of the Chronicler:\n\u201c_exceeding_ (l\u0101r\u014dbh) much spoil.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2075They smote also the tents of cattle, and carried away sheep in\n abundance and camels, and returned to Jerusalem.\n\n=15.= _the tents of cattle_] These words are so strange an expression\nthat it is probable the text is corrupt. If so, the original reading is\nunknown, for the LXX. has the same reading as the Hebrew It adds a\nproper name, evidently intended as the name of an Arabian tribe, but\nthis addition appears to be a gloss derived from a reading of the LXX.\nin xxii. 1.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XV.\n\n\n =1\u201215= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE PROPHECY OF AZARIAH THE SON OF ODED AND ITS SEQUEL.\n\n \u00b9And the spirit of God came upon Azariah the son of Oded:\n\n=1.= _Azariah the son of Oded_] is mentioned only in this passage.\nCompare xvi. 7, where a prophet (Hanani), also known to us only through\nChronicles, delivers a rebuke to Asa.\n\n \u00b2and he went out to meet Asa, and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa,\n and all Judah and Benjamin: the LORD is with you, while ye be\n with him; and if ye seek him, he will be found of you; but if ye\n forsake him, he will forsake you.\n\n=2.= _went out to meet_] Compare xix. 2.\n\n_if ye seek him_] compare 1 Chronicles xxviii. 9.\n\nVerses 3\u20126 contain the reflections of the Chronicler himself or a\nglossator on the whole course of Israelite history. The wording is\ntoo vague and there are periods in the history too obscure to make it\npossible to determine the reference definitely.\n\n \u00b3Now for long seasons\u00b9 Israel hath been without the true God,\n and without a teaching priest, and without law: \u2074but when in\n their distress they turned unto the LORD, the God of Israel, and\n sought him, he was found of them.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _a long season_.\n\n=3.= _without a teaching priest, and without law_] The connection\nbetween these two is closer than the English suggests. \u201cLaw\u201d (Hebrew\n_t\u014drah_) is properly \u201cteaching, guidance.\u201d A \u201cteaching\u201d priest (Hebrew\n_m\u014dreh_) is one who gives \u201ct\u014drah\u201d or \u201cguidance\u201d on doubtful points of\nmorality or ritual. Compare Malachi ii. 7.\n\n \u2075And in those times there was no peace to him that went out,\n nor to him that came in, but great vexations were upon all the\n inhabitants of the lands.\n\n=5.= _vexations_] Rather, =afflictions=; compare Acts xii. 1, \u201cto vex\n(Revised Version \u2018to afflict\u2019) certain of the church.\u201d\n\n_of the lands_] The reference is probably to the Israelite territory\nonly; compare xi. 23, xxxiv. 33; and 1 Chronicles xiii. 2 (margin).\n\n \u2076And they were broken in pieces, nation against nation, and city\n against city: for God did vex them with all adversity.\n\n=6.= _nation against nation_] Apparently Israel is meant. In the\ncivil strife of the days of the Judges, and again in the contentions\nof the Northern and Southern Kingdoms, Israel seemed at times to be a\ncollection of related but hostile tribes: compare Judges viii. 13\u201217,\nix. 26 ff., xii. 1 ff., xx. 12 ff.\n\n_vex_] Rather, =afflict=; see verse 5.\n\n \u2077But be ye strong, and let not your hands be slack: for your\n work shall be rewarded.\n\n=7.= _be ye strong_, etc.] The prophet\u2019s warning is continued in this\nverse.\n\n \u2078And when Asa heard these words, and\u00b9 the prophecy of Oded the\n prophet, he took courage, and put away the abominations out of\n all the land of Judah and Benjamin, and out of the cities which\n he had taken from the hill country of Ephraim; and he renewed\n the altar of the LORD, that was before the porch of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _even_.\n\n=8.= _and the prophecy of Oded the prophet_] Some words have fallen\nout of the text. Read, =even the prophecy which Azariah the son of Oded\nprophesied=.\n\n_the abominations_] compare 1 Kings xiv. 23, 24, xv. 12, 13.\n\n_the cities which he had taken_) A loose reference to those said to\nhave been captured by Abijah (xiii. 19). There is no record of any\ntaken by Asa himself.\n\n_the hill country of Ephraim_] The term describes the hilly country\nbetween the plain of Esdraelon and the territory of Benjamin.\n\n_that was before the porch_] Compare vii. 7, viii. 12.\n\n \u2079And he gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and them that sojourned\n with them out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon: for\n they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that\n the LORD his God was with him.\n\n=9.= _them that sojourned with them_] Compare x. 17, xi. 16, 17, xvi. 1.\n\n_out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon_] In view of the\nevidence of Kings and the special character of Chronicles this\nstatement cannot be regarded as having historical value for the time of\nAsa. Taking it in connection with similar notices in 1 Chronicles ix. 3\n(Ephraim and Manasseh), xii. 8, 19 (Gad and Manasseh), 2 Chronicles xxx.\n1, 10, 11, 18, xxxiv. 9 (Ephraim and Manasseh; also Zebulun, Issachar,\nand perhaps Asher) we may infer that these references have significance\nfor the time of the Chronicler (or his source) and were inserted either\n(a)\u00a0to gratify the wishes of certain orthodox families in Jerusalem who\ncounted themselves descendants of North Israelite families, especially\nof Ephraim and Manasseh, and were eager to think that their ancestors\nhad associated themselves with the fortunes of the _true_ Israel at\nan early date after the separation of the kingdoms or at least in\npre-exilic days. Or (b)\u2015\u2015an interesting suggestion first advanced by\nStade and recently developed by H\u00f6lscher (_Pal\u00e4stina in der persischen\nund hellenistischen Zeit_, 1903, pp. 30\u201237)\u2015\u2015we may suppose that the\nreference is not to families resident in Jerusalem but to persons\nliving in the territories once occupied by Ephraim, Manasseh, etc., and\nloyal to the faith of the orthodox community in Jerusalem. The former\nview seems favoured by 1 Chronicles ix. 3, the latter by 2 Chronicles\nxxx. 25 (despite the last words); and on general grounds the latter\nview seems preferable to the present writer. If so, we have in\nChronicles the first traces of the extension of Judaism northwards from\nJudea into Samaria and Galilee. H\u00f6lscher thinks that the evidence of\nChronicles can be supported from the late chapters Zechariah ix.\u2012xiv.,\nand from passages in Judith.\n\n_Simeon_] The territory of this tribe lay in the South (1 Chronicles\niv. 28\u201243; Joshua xix. 1\u20129), and it is natural to think that at the\ndisruption Simeon followed Judah in allegiance to the house of David.\nHere, however, and in xxxiv. 6 it is reckoned as one of the ten tribes\nforming the Northern Kingdom, for what reason it is hard to say. The\ntraditions relating to the tribe are far from clear (see _Encyclopedia\nBritannica_ s.v. _Simeon_).\n\n \u00b9\u2070So they gathered themselves together at Jerusalem in the third\n month, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Asa.\n\n=10.= _in the third month_] In this month the Feast of Weeks (i.e. of\nwheat harvest) was held; Deuteronomy xvi. 9.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And they sacrificed unto the LORD in that day, of the spoil\n which they had brought, seven hundred oxen and seven thousand\n sheep.\n\n=11.= _the spoil_] Compare xiv. 13\u201215.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And they entered into the covenant to seek the LORD, the God\n of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul;\n\n=12.= _they entered into the covenant_] Compare xxix. 10; 2 Kings\nxxiii. 3.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and that whosoever would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel,\n should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or\n woman.\n\n=13.= _should be put to death_] According to the Law; Deuteronomy xvii.\n2\u20127.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And they sware unto the LORD with a loud voice, and with\n shouting, and with trumpets, and with cornets.\n\n=14.= _shouting_] The word (_ter\u016b\u2018\u0101h_) is used to denote a blast with\nthe festal trumpets; see next note.\n\n_trumpets_] The word (_h\u0103\u1e63\u014d\u1e63\u0115r\u0101h_) means a special kind of trumpet\nused only for religious purposes; Numbers x. 1\u201210; 1 Chronicles xv. 24\n(note). Driver, _Amos_, pp. 144\u20126, gives an illustration derived from\nthe Arch of Titus.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with\n all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he\n was found of them: and the LORD gave them rest round about.\n\n=15.= _he was found of them_] A fulfilment of the promise given in\nverse 2.\n\n\n =16\u201219= (1 Kings xv. 13\u201215).\n OTHER RELIGIOUS MEASURES OF ASA.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And also Maacah the mother of Asa the king, he removed her\n from being queen\u00b9, because she had made an abominable image for\n an Asherah\u00b2; and Asa cut down her image, and made dust of it,\n and burnt it at the brook Kidron.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _queen mother_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _for Asherah_.\n\n=16.= _And also Maacah_] \u201cMaacah the daughter of Abishalom\u201d is\ndescribed as the mother of Abijam (Abijah) in 1 Kings xv. 2 and as\nthe mother of Asa in 1 Kings xv. 10, although Asa is described as the\nson of Abijam (Abijah) in 1 Kings xv. 8. Most probably Maacah was the\ngrandmother of Asa but retained her position as queen mother during two\nreigns, i.e. until removed by Asa.\n\n_from being queen_] Or, as margin, =from being queen mother=.\n\n_an abominable image_] Exactly what is meant by this phrase is\nuncertain. The image was one of peculiarly repulsive appearance, or\nperhaps of specially degrading significance.\n\n_for an Asherah_] Revised Version margin (rightly, as representing the\nmeaning of the Chronicler) for =Asherah=, since Asherah here and in\na few other passages (1 Kings xviii. 19; 2 Kings xxi. 7, xxiii. 4, 7)\nis to be translated as the name of a goddess, about whom however very\nlittle is known. Excavations at Ta\u2018anach have revealed that a goddess\nnamed _Ashirat_ (= _Asherah_) was worshipped in Palestine from an\nearly period. The references here and in the passages cited above\nwould therefore seem to be to this goddess. That conclusion, if sound,\ndisposes of the opinion that the Chronicler was mistaken in imagining\nthat \u201cAsh\u0113rah\u201d was anything more than a common noun denoting the wooden\nsymbol of a deity. We must of course translate according to the meaning\nof the Chronicler whether he has fallen into an error or not. See also\nthe note on xiv. 3, p. 224.\n\n_the brook Kidron_] On the east of Jerusalem, an unclean place; compare\n2 Kings xxiii. 4, \u201cin the fields of Kidron.\u201d B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075,\np. 80.\n\n \u00b9\u2077But the high places were not taken away out of Israel:\n nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect all his days.\n\n=17.= _the high places_] Hebrew _b\u0101m\u014dth_. These were not necessarily\nplaces of idolatrous worship, but they were sanctuaries rigorously\nforbidden by the Law from the Deuteronomic period onwards, which in\nthe opinion of the Chronicler of course meant from the time of Moses.\nFailure to \u201cremove\u201d the high places was therefore reckoned by him as\na sin in any of the kings, no matter how early in the period of the\nmonarchy.\n\n_were not taken away ... days_] So also 1 Kings xv. 14, but a direct\ncontradiction of the Chronicler\u2019s statement in xiv. 3! Two explanations\nseem possible; _either_, \u201cIsrael\u201d (contrary to the frequent usage of\nthe word in Chronicles, see xi. 3) here denotes the Northern Kingdom as\ndistinct from Judah, in which case xiv. 3 is to be taken as referring\nonly to Judah, _or_ perhaps these verses 16\u201219 are an addition to\nChronicles inserted by someone who thought the Chronicler had\nwrongfully neglected 1 Kings xv. 13\u201215.\n\n_perfect_] i.e. \u201cwhole, undivided in its allegiance.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2078And he brought into the house of God the things that his\n father had dedicated, and that he himself had dedicated, silver,\n and gold, and vessels.\n\n=18.= _the things that his father had dedicated_] Probably _spoils of\nwar_; compare 1 Chronicles xviii. 11. It is implied that Abijah had\nvowed a portion of his spoils, but that Asa first actually presented\nthem in the Temple. The verse is quoted _verbatim_ from 1 Kings xv. 15,\nand is most obscure, so that there is probability in the view that\nit is only a misplaced repetition of 1 Kings vii. 51b. No stress can\ntherefore be laid on the suggestion that we may see in this statement\nan indirect confirmation of Abijah\u2019s victory recorded in 2 Chronicles\nxiii.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And there was no more war unto the five and thirtieth year of\n the reign of Asa.\n\n=19.= _there was no more war_] This statement can be reconciled\nwith 1 Kings xv. 16, 32 only by interpreting it broadly to mean that\nnothing serious occurred until the war with Baasha had been going on\nfor several years: a forced interpretation. Perhaps the Chronicler\ndeliberately contradicts Kings \u201cthere was war between Asa and Baasha\nall their days,\u201d assigning to Asa\u2019s reign a time of peace which seemed\nappropriate to his piety.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVI.\n\n\n =1\u20126= (= 1 Kings xv. 17\u201222).\n ASA ASKS HELP OF BEN-HADAD.\n\n \u00b9In the six and thirtieth year of the reign of Asa, Baasha king\n of Israel went up against Judah, and built Ramah, that he might\n not suffer any to go out or come in to Asa king of Judah.\n\n=1.= _the six and thirtieth year_] According to 1 Kings xvi. 8 Baasha\nwas succeeded by his son Elah in the six-and-twentieth year of Asa.\nThe number _thirty-six_ may therefore be wrong. It should be noticed\nhowever that the _thirty-sixth_ year of the separate kingdom of Judah\ncorresponds with the _sixteenth_ year of Asa, so that possibly two\ndifferent reckonings are here confused and we should read, =In the\nsix and thirtieth year, that is, in the sixteenth year of Asa=. So\nin xv. 19 we should read, =in the five and thirtieth, that is, in\nthe fifteenth year of the reign of Asa=. This scheme of Asa\u2019s reign,\nhowever, agrees badly with the dominant ideas of the Chronicler,\nfor the religious reform and covenant in the fifteenth year (verse\n10) _ought_ not to have been immediately followed by war in the\nsixteenth year, but rather by a period of peace and prosperity. Hence\n_thirty-six_ may after all be the original text, and we must suppose\nthat the Chronicler either ignored or overlooked 1 Kings xvi. 8; or\nperhaps that he quoted from a midrashic source, having a different\nsystem of chronology from that in Kings.\n\n_Ramah_] The modern _er-R\u0101m_, situated on a commanding hill about two\nhours north of Jerusalem. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 216.\n\n \u00b2Then Asa brought out silver and gold out of the treasures\n of the house of the LORD and of the king\u2019s house, and sent to\n Ben-hadad king of Syria, that dwelt at Damascus\u00b9, saying, \u00b3_There\n is_\u00b2 a league between me and thee, as _there was_ between my\n father and thy father: behold, I have sent thee silver and gold;\n go, break thy league with Baasha king of Israel, that he may\n depart from me.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Darmesek_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, Let there be.\n\n=2.= _silver and gold_] In 1 Kings, \u201call the silver and the gold that\nwere left.\u201d\n\n_Ben-hadad_] At least three kings of Syria bore this name, the two\nothers being severally (1)\u00a0a contemporary of Ahab (1 Kings xx. 1 ff.),\n(2)\u00a0a contemporary of Jehoash the grandson of Jehu, 2 Kings xiii. 25.\n\n_that dwelt at Damascus_] The epithet distinguishes the king of\nDamascus from other kings of Syria, e.g. from the king of Hamath.\n\n_Damascus_] Hebrew \u201cDarmesek\u201d; see note on 1 Chronicles xviii. 5.\n\n \u2074And Ben-hadad hearkened unto king Asa, and sent the captains\n of his armies against the cities of Israel; and they smote Ijon,\n and Dan, and Abel-maim, and all the store cities\u00b9 of Naphtali.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _storehouses of the cities_.\n\n=4.= _and they smote_] The places smitten were all in the extreme north\nof Israel.\n\n_Ijon_] The city cannot be identified, but the name is preserved\nin _Merj \u2018Iy\u016bn_, a table-land north of the Jordan valley. B\u00e4deker,\n_Palestine_\u2075, p. 291.\n\n_Abel-maim_] In 1 Kings, \u201cAbel-beth-maacah\u201d; compare 2 Samuel xx. 14,\n15. No doubt the two names designate one place.\n\n_all the store cities_] In 1 Kings, \u201call Chinneroth\u201d (i.e. the district\nwest of the Sea of Galilee). As this was a very fruitful district, the\n\u201cstore cities\u201d of the Chronicler may be only another name for it.\n\n \u2075And it came to pass, when Baasha heard thereof, that he left\n off building of Ramah, and let his work cease.\n\n=5.= _and let his work cease_] In 1 Kings _and dwelt in Tirzah_\n(Hebrew), _and returned to Tirzah_ (LXX.). Baasha (like Jeroboam;\n1 Kings xiv. 17) fixed his seat of government at Tirzah in the centre\nof the Northern Kingdom in order to be able to watch Syria as well as\nJudah. The Chronicler takes no interest in the home of Baasha.\n\n \u2076Then Asa the king took all Judah; and they carried away the\n stones of Ramah, and the timber thereof, wherewith Baasha had\n builded; and he built therewith Geba and Mizpah.\n\n=6.= _took all Judah_] In 1 Kings _summoned all Judah_ (so translate);\n_none was exempted_.\n\n_Geba and Mizpah_] The names signify, \u201cthe hill and the watch-tower.\u201d\nGeba is mentioned in 2 Kings xxiii. 8, evidently as being on the\nnorthern boundary of Judah. Yet, be it noted, it was only 7 miles north\nof Jerusalem, whilst Mizpah was about 5 miles north-west of the capital.\nFor Mizpah see Jeremiah xli. 1\u20129. See also note on xiv. 6\u20128.\n\n\n =7\u201210= (not in 1 Kings).\n THE INTERVENTION OF HANANI.\n\nThe Chronicler stands alone both in recording the condemnation of Asa\nin this passage and in himself condemning him in verse 12. In 1 Kings\nno blame is passed on Asa.\n\n \u2077And at that time Hanani the seer came to Asa king of Judah, and\n said unto him, Because thou hast relied on the king of Syria,\n and hast not relied on the LORD thy God, therefore is the host\n of the king of Syria escaped out of thine hand.\n\n=7.= _Hanani the seer_] Hanani _as a seer_ is known to us from this\npassage only; but in xix. 2 and xx. 34 (also 1 Kings xvi. 1) Jehu the\nprophet is called son of Hanani.\n\n_the seer_] an ancient title, elsewhere applied only to Samuel. Compare\n1 Samuel ix. 9 \u201che that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called\na Seer.\u201d In consequence of this phrase it has been supposed that the\nstory of Hanani is a genuinely old tradition. This is possible, but\nthe evidence of this one phrase is not sufficient to be convincing. The\nterm may be a deliberate archaism of the Chronicler.\n\n_therefore is the host of the king of Syria escaped_] The prophet\ndeclares that if Asa had not detached Syria by his presents, he might\nhave smitten Israel and Syria combined.\n\n \u2078Were not the Ethiopians and the Lubim a huge host, with\n chariots and horsemen exceeding many? yet, because thou didst\n rely on the LORD, he delivered them into thine hand.\n\n=8.= _and the Lubim_] The Lubim are not mentioned in xiv. 9\u201213, but as\nthey were auxiliaries of the Egyptians (xii. 3) it is quite possible\nthat they represent the help given by Egypt to the Arabian Cushites as\nthey passed the Egyptian border on their way to invade Judah. Compare\nnote on xiv. 9 (_three hundred chariots_).\n\n \u2079For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole\n earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart\n is perfect toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly; for from\n henceforth thou shalt have wars.\n\n=9.= _run to and fro_] i.e. no event escapes the Divine vigilance,\ncompare Zechariah iv. 10.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Then Asa was wroth with the seer, and put him in the prison\n house\u00b9; for he was in a rage with him because of this thing. And\n Asa oppressed some of the people the same time.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _house of the stocks_.\n\n=10.= _in the prison house_] Render, =in the stocks= (literally _in the\nhouse of the stocks_). Compare xviii. 26; Jeremiah xx. 2.\n\n_oppressed_] literally _brake in pieces_, an expression which when\napplied to things would mean _made spoil of_, when applied to persons\n_treated outrageously, tortured_, \u1f10\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf LXX.\n\n\n =11\u201214= (= 1 Kings xv. 23, 24).\n THE EPILOGUE OF ASA\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And, behold, the acts of Asa, first and last, lo, they are\n written in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel. \u00b9\u00b2And in\n the thirty and ninth year of his reign Asa was diseased in his\n feet; his disease was exceeding great: yet in his disease he\n sought not to the LORD, but to the physicians.\n\n=11.= _the book of the kings of Judah and Israel_] In 1 Kings the\nappeal is to \u201cthe book of chronicles of the kings of Judah.\u201d See\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a05.\n\n_he sought not to the LORD, but to the physicians_] _Physicians_\n(Hebrew _r\u014dph\u2019\u012bm_) are condemned by implication here, perhaps as using\nincantations and adjurations. Contrast Ecclesiasticus (_Ben Sira_)\nxxxviii. 9\u201215, especially verse 15 (Hebrew text), _He that sinneth\nagainst his Maker will behave himself proudly against a physician_.\nCurtis notes the connection of the art of healing with the prophets;\ncompare 1 Kings xvii. 17 ff. (Elijah); 2 Kings iv. 19 ff. (Elisha);\n2 Kings xx. 7 (Isaiah).\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And Asa slept with his fathers, and died in the one and\n fortieth year of his reign.\n\n=13.= _in the one and fortieth year_] Compare 1 Kings xv. 10.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And they buried him in his own sepulchres, which he had hewn\n out for himself in the city of David, and laid him in the bed\n which was filled with sweet odours and divers kinds _of spices_\n prepared by the apothecaries\u2019 art: and they made a very great\n burning for him.\n\n=14.= _in his own sepulchres_] In 1 Kings _with his fathers_.\n\n_which he had hewn out for himself_] This clause is absent from 1 Kings.\n\n_divers kinds_ of spices] Mark xvi. 1; John xii. 3, 7, xix. 39, 40.\n\n_a very great burning_] Compare xxi. 19. What is here meant is not\ncremation of the body, but only a burning of spices; Jeremiah xxxiv. 5.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTERS XVII.\u2012XX.\n THE REIGN OF JEHOSHAPHAT.\n\n\n CHAPTER XVII.\n\n\n =1\u20126.=\n THE CHARACTER OF THE REIGN.\n\nThe reign of Jehoshaphat is one of the most interesting sections\nof Chronicles If these chapters, xvii.\u2012xx., be compared with the\nreferences to Jehoshaphat in Kings (viz. 1 Kings xxii. 1\u201235, 41\u201250),\nit will be seen that much new material appears in Chronicles (chapter\nxvii., and xix. 1\u2012xx. 30), with the result that the prosperity and\npiety of this king are greatly enhanced. As to the historical value of\nthe Chronicler\u2019s account, see the head-notes to the various sections\nbelow.\n\n \u00b9And Jehoshaphat his son reigned in his stead, and strengthened\n himself against Israel.\n\n=1.= _And Jehoshaphat his son reigned in his stead_] These words are\nfrom 1 Kings xv. 24. All the rest of this chapter is without any\nparallel in Kings.\n\n \u00b2And he placed forces in all the fenced cities of Judah, and set\n garrisons in the land of Judah, and in the cities of Ephraim,\n which Asa his father had taken.\n\n=2.= _the cities of Ephraim_] Compare xv. 8.\n\n \u00b3And the LORD was with Jehoshaphat, because he walked in the\n first ways of his father David, and sought not unto the Baalim;\n\n=3.= _in the first ways of his father David_] Omit _David_ (so LXX.),\nthe person referred to being _Asa_ (1 Kings xxii. 43). Asa\u2019s _first\nways_ (chapters xiv., xv.) were good, his latter ways (chapter xvi.),\naccording to the Chronicler, were evil.\n\n_unto the Baalim_] Baal is not a proper name, but a title meaning\n\u201cLord,\u201d which was given to false gods generally. Israel might not\ncall Jehovah, \u201cMy Baal\u201d (_Baali_), Hosea ii. 16, 17. See the note on\n1 Chronicles viii. 33.\n\n \u2074but sought to the God of his father, and walked in his\n commandments, and not after the doings of Israel.\n\n=4.= _after the doings of Israel_] Compare xiii. 8, 9.\n\n \u2075Therefore the LORD stablished the kingdom in his hand; and all\n Judah brought to Jehoshaphat presents; and he had riches and\n honour in abundance.\n\n=5.= _brought ... presents_] Probably congratulatory gifts at his\naccession; compare 1 Samuel x. 27.\n\n_riches and honour_] Compare xviii. 1.\n\n \u2076And his heart was lifted up in the ways of the LORD: and\n furthermore he took away the high places and the Asherim out of\n Judah.\n\n=6.= _furthermore he took away_] But in xx. 33 = 1 Kings xxii. 43 it\nis said that the high places were _not_ taken away. It is remarkable\nthat the contradiction finds an exact parallel in what is said of\nAsa (see xiv. 3 and xv. 17 = 1 Kings xv. 14). How can the presence of\nthese curious contradictions be explained? It is held by some that the\nChronicler in both cases has incorporated contradictory traditions, and\nthat \u201csuch discrepancies did not trouble the Hebrew historian.\u201d To the\npresent writer it seems more probable to suppose that _only_ xiv. 3 and\nxvii. 6 (the statements that the high places _were_ removed), are from\nthe Chronicler himself; the passages which assert the contrary, viz.\nxv. 17 (= 1 Kings xv. 14) and xx. 33 (= 1 Kings xxii. 43) being later\nadditions. They were added by someone who, troubled by the divergence\nbetween Kings and Chronicles, judged it desirable to supplement\nor correct the Chronicler\u2019s words by adding a more or less exact\ntranscription of the summaries of the reigns of Asa and Jehoshaphat\nas recorded in Kings. If xv. 17 and xx. 33 are later additions, it is\nevident that the Chronicler asserts the same reform to have been made\nin two successive reigns. But this is not a serious difficulty. He\nmay easily have supposed that the removal of the high places (i.e. the\ndiscontinuance of worship at these local sanctuaries) was but a partial\nsuccess, an official rather than an actual reform; and one suspects\nalso that the phrase for the Chronicler was largely conventional: a\nreform with which all \u201cgood\u201d kings should presumably be credited.\n\n_the Asherim_] See note on xiv. 3.\n\n\n =7\u20129= (no parallel in 1 Kings).\n JEHOSHAPHAT\u2019S PROVISION FOR TEACHING THE LAW.\n\n \u2077Also in the third year of his reign he sent his princes, even\n Benhail, and Obadiah, and Zechariah, and Nethanel, and Micaiah,\n to teach in the cities of Judah; \u2078and with them the Levites,\n even Shemaiah, and Nethaniah, and Zebadiah, and Asahel, and\n Shemiramoth, and Jehonathan, and Adonijah, and Tobijah, and\n Tobadonijah, the Levites; and with them Elishama and Jehoram,\n the priests. \u2079And they taught in Judah, having the book of the\n law of the LORD with them; and they went about throughout all\n the cities of Judah, and taught among the people.\n\n=7\u20129.= These verses state that Jehoshaphat was not content with the\nusual reforming measures of a pious king (verse 6) but proceeded to\nconfirm his people in loyalty to Jehovah by sending leading laymen,\nLevites, and priests, to teach the Law throughout the land. If verses\n7\u20129 be compared with xix. 4\u201211 the two passages will at once be seen\nto be so closely similar that they may well be variations of the same\ntradition. Still the description in xix. 4\u201211 is fuller and suggests\narrangements of a permanent character; and, whilst xvii. 7\u20129 deals\nwith _teachers_ of the Law, xix. 4\u201211 deals with administrators of it\n(_judges_). It is argued with force that this single or dual tradition\nis entirely unhistorical (so Wellhausen and Torrey). Certainly\nthe arrangements for the judiciary and for instruction in the Law\ncorrespond with conditions _circa_ 100 B.C. (see Sch\u00fcrer, _Geschichte_\u00b3,\nII. 176\u2012179), conditions which probably in the Chronicler\u2019s day were\npartly existent and which he may have hoped to see more fully realised.\nThat he should wish to ascribe the institution of such a system of\ninstruction and justice to an early date is also agreeable to his\nhabit of thought; and for such a purpose Jehoshaphat was obviously\nmost suitable: a good king, whose name denoted \u201cJehovah is judge.\u201d Mark\nfurther the similarity of the conclusion of each reform: \u201cAnd the fear\nof the LORD was on all the kingdoms of the lands ...\u201d (xvii. 10 and\nxx. 29) and the remarkable prosperity which properly rewarded such\npious action (xvii. 11 ff. and xx. 1\u201228). Yet the possibility that the\nChronicler in these passages has incorporated a really old tradition\nassociating Jehoshaphat with some reform or development of judicial\naffairs in Judah remains open. Some see an old trait in the conjunction\nof laymen (_princes_, xvii. 7) with the priests and Levites. Again\nthe judicial system indicated in xix. 4\u201211 has no little resemblance\nto that set forth in Deuteronomy xvi. 18\u201220, xvii. 8, \u201cand might have\nbeen derived from that source.\u201d On this theory, xvii. 7\u20129 and xix. 4\u201211\nwould in all likelihood be derived by the Chronicler from some \u201csource\u201d\nor rather perhaps from two \u201csources\u201d giving slightly different accounts\nof Jehoshaphat\u2019s procedure; and this is the view of some commentators\n(so Kittel and Benzinger). But close examination of the language\nof both passages reveals strong characteristics of the Chronicler\u2019s\nstyle and spirit; and it seems safer to conclude that, while there\n_may_ possibly have been some tradition connecting Jehoshaphat with\nsuch reforms, this account in Chronicles is essentially due to the\nChronicler and reflects the situation of his own times.\n\n=9.= _the book of the law of the LORD_] The Chronicler of course meant\nby this the Pentateuch as we have it. If, however, these verses are\ndrawn from an old source (see the previous note) then the reference in\nthe original may have been to one of the earlier codes embedded in the\npresent Pentateuch.\n\n\n =10\u201213= (no parallel in 1 Kings).\n THE GREATNESS OF JEHOSHAPHAT.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the fear of the LORD\u00b9 fell upon all the kingdoms of the\n lands that were round about Judah, so that they made no war\n against Jehoshaphat.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _a terror from the LORD_.\n\n=10.= _the fear of the LORD_] Compare xx. 29; Genesis xxxxv. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And some of the Philistines brought Jehoshaphat presents, and\n silver for tribute; the Arabians also brought him flocks, seven\n thousand and seven hundred rams, and seven thousand and seven\n hundred he-goats.\n\n=11.= _some of the Philistines_] See the following note, and also xxvi.\n6 (note).\n\n_the Arabians_] compare xxi. 16. The term is here used to signify\nthe desert tribes, in particular those on the south and south-west of\nJudah. It would be specially impressive to the contemporaries of the\nChronicler, because by that period an Arabian people, the Nabateans,\nhad established a powerful state to the south of Judah. On the other\nhand the Philistines would of course be familiar from the references to\nthem in Samuel and Kings. The tradition that tribute was received from\nthem and from some desert tribes may possibly be correct, especially if\nZerah\u2019s army was Arabian (xiv. 8, note) and if Asa\u2019s victory over him\nis historical.\n\n_flocks_] compare 2 Kings iii. 4.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And Jehoshaphat waxed great exceedingly; and he built in Judah\n castles and cities of store. \u00b9\u00b3And he had many works in the\n cities of Judah; and men of war, mighty men of valour, in\n Jerusalem.\n\n=12.= _castles_] Hebrew _b\u012br\u0101niyy\u014dth_; compare xxvii. 4 (same word);\nand xxvi. 10 (\u201ctowers\u201d). Such small castles or towers lie scattered\nalong the pilgrim-road from Damascus to Mecca at the present day to\nmake the way safe. See Introduction \u00a7\u00a07, p. xlviii.\n\n_cities of store_] compare xi. 11, 12.\n\n\n =14\u201219= (no parallel in 1 Kings).\n THE NUMBER OF JEHOSHAPHAT\u2019S ARMY.\n\nIn these verses Jehoshaphat is credited with an army of 1,160,000\nmen; and the passage may be noted as the most extreme instance of the\nmidrashic exaggeration of numbers which is a well-marked feature of\nthe Chronicler\u2019s writing. If the possible proportions between the\ntotal numbers of a population and the men capable of military service\nat a given time be considered, it is easy to realise how monstrous\nan exaggeration are the figures here stated. They serve two purposes:\n(1)\u00a0compared with the somewhat smaller numbers assigned to Abijah\n(xiii. 3) and to Asa (xiv. 8), they indicate that Jehoshaphat\u2019s\nreign was even more prosperous; and (2)\u00a0generally, they suggested to\nthe men of the Chronicler\u2019s own generation that in the eyes of all\nright-thinking men Jerusalem of old in its prosperous hours was not one\nwhit less important and glorious than any huge and much-vaunted city of\ntheir own days.\n\nFor further examples of midrashic exaggeration, besides the passages\nnamed above, compare xi. 1; 1 Chronicles xii. 23, 24; and (as regards\nsums of money) 1 Chronicles xxii. 14; 2 Chronicles ix. 13.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And this was the numbering of them according to their fathers\u2019\n houses: of Judah, the captains of thousands; Adnah the captain,\n and with him mighty men of valour three hundred thousand: \u00b9\u2075and\n next to him Jehohanan the captain, and with him two hundred and\n fourscore thousand:\n\n=15.= _next to him_] Literally _at his hand_; the same phrase is used\nin Nehemiah iii. 2, 4, 5, etc.\n\n_Jehohanan_] Sometimes spelt _Johanan_.\n\n \u00b9\u2076and next to him Amasiah the son of Zichri, who willingly\n offered himself unto the LORD; and with him two hundred thousand\n mighty men of valour:\n\n=16.= _who willingly offered himself_] Compare Judges v. 9.\n\n \u00b9\u2077and of Benjamin; Eliada a mighty man of valour, and with him\n two hundred thousand armed with bow and shield: \u00b9\u2078and next to\n him Jehozabad, and with him an hundred and fourscore thousand\n ready prepared for war. \u00b9\u2079These were they that waited on the\n king, beside those whom the king put in the fenced cities\n throughout all Judah.\n\n=17.= _armed with bow and shield_] i.e. light-armed troops; compare\nnote on xiv. 8.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (compare 1 Kings xxii. 1\u20124).\n THE ALLIANCE BETWEEN JEHOSHAPHAT AND AHAB.\n\n \u00b9Now Jehoshaphat had riches and honour in abundance; and he\n joined affinity with Ahab.\n\n=1.= _joined affinity_] Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat married Athaliah\nthe daughter of Ahab (2 Kings viii. 16, 18, 26). Athaliah though called\n\u201cdaughter\u201d of Omri in 2 Kings viii. 26 was really his grand-daughter.\n\n \u00b2And after certain years he went down to Ahab to Samaria. And\n Ahab killed sheep and oxen for him in abundance, and for the\n people that were with him, and moved him to go up _with him_ to\n Ramoth-gilead.\n\n=2.= _killed sheep and oxen_] This phrase implies a _feast_, for flesh\nis eaten in the East only on festal occasions. The phrase used for\nsupplying necessary food is _to set bread and water before one_.\n\n_Ramoth-gilead_] Deuteronomy iv. 43; 1 Kings iv. 13, xxii. 3;\n2 Kings viii. 28, ix. 1 and 14. Ramoth was a city of refuge and (under\nSolomon) the seat of the governor of a province. Probably it was the\nmost important Israelite city east of Jordan. Its site has not been\ncertainly identified (see Barnes\u2019 note on 1 Kings iv. 13). Probably it\nwas on the Yarmuk near Edrei. In 1 Chronicles vi. 80 it is mentioned as\na city assigned to the sons of Merari. Apparently it was captured from\nIsrael by the Syrians in the time of Baasha or of Omri, and was not\nrestored in accordance with the treaty referred to in 1 Kings xx. 34.\n\n \u00b3And Ahab king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat king of Judah,\n Wilt thou go with me to Ramoth-gilead? And he answered him, I am\n as thou art, and my people as thy people; and _we will be_ with\n thee in the war.\n\n=3.= _and_ we will be _with thee in the war_] In 1 Kings the\ncorresponding phrase is, _my horses as thy horses_. The phrases in\n1 Kings need not be more than the expression of oriental politeness.\nAt the present day the Arab says to his guest, _My house is thy house_,\nbut he generally means very little by the words. The Chronicler,\nhowever, interpreting by the event, turns the vaguer phrase of Kings\ninto a definite promise.\n\n\n =4\u201227= (= 1 Kings xxii. 5\u201228).\n THE PROPHECY OF MICAIAH.\n\nThis narrative, apart from its intrinsic interest, is of great value\nfor the welcome light it throws upon the prophets in Israel. The direct\nreferences of the later Prophets have accustomed us to the thought that\n_they_ had to contend with unworthy representatives of their calling.\nHere we are made to realise with peculiar vividness that even in the\nearly stages of the national history the false prophet was a menace\nto Israel\u2019s spiritual enlightenment. Micaiah spake few words, yet he\ndeserves to rank with the great Prophets. He resembles them at least\nin his overmastering conviction of the truth and in his resolution to\nproclaim it, whatever cost of personal suffering it may entail. His\nopponents were professedly servants of Jehovah, and it is noteworthy\nthat Micaiah does not accuse them of deliberate intent to deceive Ahab\nbut rather of self-deception and ignorance of the truth (verse 21).\nTheir ignorance of course was blameworthy, for it was due to their\nwillingness to prophesy smooth things: they lacked that utter integrity\nof heart and entire devotion to his prophetic calling which Micaiah\npossessed.\n\n \u2074And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel, Inquire, I pray\n thee, at the word of the LORD to-day.\n\n=4.= _Jehoshaphat_] Compare 1 Kings iii. 11.\n\n_Inquire ... at the word_] Compare Daniel ii. 10 (Authorized Version),\n\u201cno king ... asked such things at any magician.\u201d The use of \u201cat\u201d after\nverbs of asking is obsolete.\n\n \u2075Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, four\n hundred men, and said unto them, Shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to\n battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up; for God shall\n deliver it into the hand of the king.\n\n=5.= _the prophets_] These no doubt were prophets of Jehovah (not of\nBaal); compare verse 4 and note on verse 6.\n\n_Shall we go ... or shall I forbear?_] In 1 Kings, \u201cShall I go ... or\nshall I forbear?\u201d (so LXX., but not Peshit\u1e6da, of Chronicles).\n\n \u2076But Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here besides a prophet of\n the LORD, that we might inquire of him? \u2077And the king of Israel\n said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man by whom we may\n inquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he never prophesieth\n good concerning me, but always evil: the same is Micaiah the son\n of Imla. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so.\n\n=6.= _But Jehoshaphat said_] The insertion of this lengthy account of\nan event which principally concerns the Northern Kingdom is remarkable,\nseeing that the Chronicler nowhere else inserts a narrative dealing\nwith the affairs of north Israel. Some commentators find the chief\nmotive for its insertion in this verse which credits Jehoshaphat with\nan honourable desire to ascertain Jehovah\u2019s real will. A secondary\nmotive may be that the story shows very clearly the obstinate\nwickedness of Ahab, as the Chronicler would regard it, and so lends\npoint to the censure which is subsequently passed on Jehoshaphat (xix.\n2) for his alliance with the northern king.\n\n_Is there not here besides a prophet of the LORD_] Or, =Hath not the\nLORD here yet another prophet=. The unanimity of the four hundred\nprophets aroused the suspicion of Jehoshaphat.\n\n \u2078Then the king of Israel called an officer\u00b9, and said, Fetch\n quickly Micaiah the son of Imla.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _eunuch_.\n\n=8.= _called an officer_] The Hebrew word means \u201ceunuch.\u201d From 1 Samuel\nviii. 15 we may perhaps conclude that such officers were known in\nIsrael from the very beginning of the monarchy. Compare 1 Chronicles\nxxviii. 1, note.\n\n \u2079Now the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat\n each on his throne, arrayed in their robes, and they sat in an\n open place\u00b9 at the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the\n prophets prophesied before them.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _a threshing-floor_.\n\n=9.= _in an open place_] Render, =in a threshing-floor=. The\nthreshing-floor was convenient as being a large flat open space;\ncompare Genesis l. 10; 1 Chronicles xiii. 9, xxi. 18 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron,\n and said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push\n the Syrians, until they be consumed. \u00b9\u00b9And all the prophets\n prophesied so, saying, Go up to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper: for\n the LORD shall deliver it into the hand of the king. \u00b9\u00b2And the\n messenger that went to call Micaiah spake to him, saying, Behold,\n the words of the prophets _declare_ good to the king with one\n mouth: let thy word therefore, I pray thee, be like one of\n theirs, and speak thou good.\n\n=10.= _made him horns of iron_] For a similar use of symbolic action by\na prophet compare Jeremiah xxvii. 2 (also xxviii. 10). For the meaning\nof the phrase compare Amos vi. 13, \u201cHave we not taken to us horns?\u201d i.e.\n\u201cHave we not acquired military power?\u201d\n\n_shalt thou push_] Compare Deuteronomy xxxiii. 17. So Rameses II\nis described in an Egyptian psalm as \u201cthe strong bull against the\nEthiopians; his horn pushes them.\u201d (Erman, _Ancient Egypt_, English\nTranslation, p. 57.)\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And Micaiah said, As the LORD liveth, what my God saith, that\n will I speak.\n\n=13.= _what my God saith_] Render, =surely, what my God shall say=. The\nDivine message has not yet come to the prophet.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And when he was come to the king, the king said unto him,\n Micaiah\u00b9, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I\n forbear? And he said, Go ye up, and prosper; and they shall be\n delivered into your hand.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Micah_.\n\n=14.= _Go ye up ... into your hand_] Micaiah addresses both kings. In\n1 Kings Ahab only is addressed, _Go and prosper, for the LORD shall\ndeliver it into the hand of the king_. Micaiah repeats in mocking tones\nthe utterance of the other prophets.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the king said to him, How many times shall I adjure thee\n that thou speak unto me nothing but the truth in the name of the\n LORD?\n\n=15.= _that thou speak unto me nothing but the truth_] The scorn in\nMicaiah\u2019s voice was noticed by the king.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And he said, I saw all Israel scattered upon the mountains, as\n sheep that have no shepherd: and the LORD said, These have no\n master; let them return every man to his house in peace. \u00b9\u2077And\n the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee that\n he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?\n\n=16.= _as sheep that have no shepherd_] Compare Matthew ix. 36.\n\n_the LORD said, These have no master; let them return_, etc.] The\nprophet has had a vision of Israel\u2019s army, defeated and scattered, like\na flock of sheep wandering shepherdless upon the mountains. God, he\nmeans, proclaims that in the coming battle their king will fall and\nthey will be beaten and dispersed.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And he said, Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD: I saw\n the LORD sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven\n standing on his right hand and on his left.\n\n=18.= _And he said_] There are three stages in the prophet\u2019s dealings\nwith the king, (1)\u00a0irony in verse 14, (2)\u00a0serious advice in verse 16,\n(3)\u00a0denunciation of death in verses 18\u201222.\n\n_the host of heaven_] angelic beings are meant, as in Psalms ciii. 21,\nand probably also in Nehemiah ix. 6; Daniel iv. 35, etc., but in these\npassages the usual meaning \u201cthe stars\u201d is possible. The parallel verse\nin Kings (1 Kings xxii. 19) is apparently the earliest clear instance\nof the phrase in the significance \u201cangelic beings.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2079And the LORD said, Who shall entice\u00b9 Ahab king of Israel, that\n he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one spake saying\n after this manner, and another saying after that manner.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _deceive_.\n\n=19.= _Who shall entice Ahab_] So 1 Kings (Revised Version). The same\nHebrew word is used in Jeremiah xx. 7, \u201cthou hast deceived (margin\n\u2018enticed\u2019) me,\u201d where Jeremiah complains that he has been called to the\nfruitless labour of a hated prophet. For the underlying thought that\ndelusion is sometimes a preliminary part of Divine punishment compare\n2 Thessalonians ii. 11 (compare 2 Thessalonians ii. 9) and the famous\nsaying, \u201cquem Deus vult perdere prius dementat.\u201d It should be noted\nhowever that the \u201clying spirit\u201d in the mouth of the 400 prophets played\nonly a subordinate part in Ahab\u2019s fall, and indeed could have played\nno part at all, but for the fact that the king was more than willing\nto be enticed. Ahab had already made up his mind; he consulted the 400\nonly as an afterthought to satisfy Jehoshaphat (verse 4), he excluded\nthe plain-speaking Micaiah until Jehoshaphat insisted on his presence\n(verses 6, 7), and he scorned the true prophet\u2019s warning of the\nfalseness of the 400 (verse 26). Delusion as a Divine punishment comes\nonly upon the man who is willing to be deluded.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And there came forth a spirit\u00b9, and stood before the LORD, and\n said, I will entice him. And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith?\n \u00b2\u00b9And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in\n the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt entice\n him, and shalt prevail also: go forth, and do so.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _the spirit_.\n\n=20.= _a spirit_] Hebrew _the spirit_, but the definite article\nsimply singles out one spirit from the rest. The Evil Spirit (Hebrew\n\u201cthe Satan\u201d) is not meant here but simply a superhuman being, such\nas was generally conceived to be the cause of the ecstatic condition\nmanifested by prophets of this type (compare 1 Samuel x. 5, 6).\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in\n the mouth of these thy prophets; and the LORD hath spoken evil\n concerning thee.\n\n=22.= _the LORD hath put a lying spirit..._] This and the preceding\nverse are singularly interesting for the frankness with which they\napparently regard Jehovah as causing _moral_ evil. Of course the\npassage is not to be regarded as a philosophical pronouncement on the\norigin of moral evil. Rather is it to be treated as a na\u00efve expression\nregarding a great fact of human life\u2015\u2015see the conclusion of the note\non verse 19, _who shall entice Ahab_. _Physical_ evils are constantly\ndeclared in the Old Testament to originate in Jehovah\u2019s will; they are\noften sent by Him as punishments for sin. Here too it is only as the\npenalty of previous sinfulness (verse 8 \u201cI hate him\u201d) that the evil\nmoral condition of the prophets who are deluded by the lying spirit\nfrom Jehovah is imposed. A parallel may be found in Ezekiel xiv. 1\u201211.\nIt is, however, a higher plane of thought when Jeremiah expresses the\nconviction that the false prophets of his day are not inspired at all\nby Jehovah, but speak solely out of their own hearts (Jeremiah xxiii.\n16, 21).\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near, and smote\n Micaiah upon the cheek, and said, Which way went the spirit of\n the LORD from me to speak unto thee?\n\n=23.= _Zedekiah_] He takes the lead as in verse 10.\n\n_smote ... upon the cheek_] This phrase is tantamount to \u201cgave an\ninsulting blow\u201d; compare Micah v. 1; Matthew v. 39.\n\n \u00b2\u2074And Micaiah said, Behold, thou shalt see on that day, when\n thou shalt go into an inner chamber\u00b9 to hide thyself.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _from chamber to chamber_.\n\n=24.= _Behold, thou shalt see_] Micaiah answers Zedekiah\u2019s gibe with\nthe verb \u201csee\u201d (rather than \u201cknow\u201d) because of its double meaning,\n\u201cBehold, thou shalt be a seer, thou shalt possess the power of vision,\u201d\n_when it is too late_.\n\n_go into an inner chamber_] i.e. seek safety in hiding from enemies;\ncompare 1 Kings xx. 30 (same Hebrew phrase).\n\n \u00b2\u2075And the king of Israel said, Take ye Micaiah, and carry him\n back unto Amon the governor of the city, and to Joash the king\u2019s\n son;\n\n=25.= _carry him back_] Micaiah is not to accompany the expedition,\nhaving foretold its failure.\n\n \u00b2\u2076and say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison,\n and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of\n affliction, until I return in peace.\n\n=26.= _bread of affliction ... water of affliction_] Compare Ezekiel\niv. 9\u201211.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And Micaiah said, If thou return at all in peace, the LORD\n hath not spoken by me. And he said, Hear, ye peoples, all of you.\n\n=27.= _ye peoples, all of you_] The \u201cpeoples\u201d represented at this\ngathering were probably, Israel, Judah, Edom, and Moab. The clause\noccurs in Micah i. 2, and in all probability has been added to the text\nof Kings (which the Chronicler here copies) by a glossator, who perhaps\nthought that Micaiah and Micah were one and the same person.\n\n\n =28\u201234= (= 1 Kings xxii. 29\u201237).\n THE DEATH OF AHAB AT RAMOTH-GILEAD.\n\n \u00b2\u2078So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah\n went up to Ramoth-gilead. \u00b2\u2079And the king of Israel said unto\n Jehoshaphat, I will disguise myself, and go into the battle; but\n put thou on thy robes. So the king of Israel disguised himself;\n and they went into the battle.\n\n=29.= _I will disguise myself_] Despite the warning uttered by Micaiah\nthe two kings decide to seek battle, and Ahab, whose failing was not\nthe lack of courage, resolved to take part in the fighting. To avert\nthe fulfilment of the prophecy, he suggests that he should not wear his\nroyal insignia, whilst Jehoshaphat, whose life had not been threatened,\nshould wear his robes and be the obvious leader of the allied army.\n\n_and they went into the battle_] 1 Kings (more correctly) _and he_\n(Ahab) _went into the battle_ (so LXX. here).\n\n \u00b3\u2070Now the king of Syria had commanded the captains of his\n chariots, saying, Fight neither with small nor great, save only\n with the king of Israel.\n\n=30.= _the captains of his chariots_] _Thirty-two_ in number (1 Kings).\nWhile the rest of the Syrian army met the Israelite attack, the\nchariots were to act as an independent force, whose primary task should\nbe to kill or capture Ahab. The king of Syria felt himself overmatched\nand thought that the only chance of victory lay in the fall of the\nIsraelite commander. Compare 2 Kings iii. 26 (the king of Moab tries to\nbreak through to the king of Edom).\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw\n Jehoshaphat, that they said, It is the king of Israel. Therefore\n they turned about to fight against him: but Jehoshaphat cried\n out, and the LORD helped him; and God moved them _to depart_\n from him. \u00b3\u00b2And it came to pass, when the captains of the\n chariots saw that it was not the king of Israel, that they\n turned back from pursuing him.\n\n=31.= _saw Jehoshaphat ... to fight_] The captains of the chariots\nwho had been instructed to direct all their efforts towards slaying\nthe king of Israel, at length perceived Jehoshaphat conspicuous in his\nroyal robes. The various chariots turned aside from lesser enemies, and\nthen, discovering their mistake and obeying their orders, left him to\ncontinue their search for Ahab.\n\n_and God moved them_ to depart _from him_] These words anticipate verse\n32 and are not found in 1 Kings Jehoshaphat\u2019s cry was to his soldiers\nfor aid, but the Chronicler apparently took it to be a cry to Jehovah,\nand accordingly added these words.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And a certain man drew his bow at a venture\u00b9, and smote the\n king of Israel between the joints of the harness\u00b2: wherefore he\n said to the driver of the chariot, Turn thine hand, and carry me\n out of the host; for I am sore wounded.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _in his simplicity_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _the lower armour and the breastplate_.\n\n=33.= _And a certain man drew a bow_] Render, =But a certain man had\ndrawn a bow=. God had already brought about that which the Syrians were\nlabouring to perform.\n\n_at a venture_] literally =in his innocence=, i.e. without knowing that\nhe was aiming at Ahab. Compare 2 Samuel xv. 11.\n\n_between the joints of the harness_] Probably between the breastplate\n(or coat of mail) and the appendages to it; the wound would be in the\nlower part of the body.\n\n \u00b3\u2074And the battle increased that day: howbeit the king of Israel\n stayed himself up in his chariot against the Syrians until the\n even: and about the time of the going down of the sun he died.\n\n=34.= _stayed himself up in his chariot_] 1 Kings _was stayed up_. Ahab\nsustained his reputation as a good soldier (compare 1 Kings xx. 14,\nxxii. 31) to the last; his death caused the failure of the attack on\nRamoth (1 Kings xxii. 36).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XIX.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE REPROOF OF JEHU THE PROPHET.\n\n \u00b9And Jehoshaphat the king of Judah returned to his house in\n peace to Jerusalem.\n\n=1.= _in peace_] i.e. in safety. LXX. (B) omitted the phrase.\n\n \u00b2And Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him, and\n said to king Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the wicked, and\n love them that hate the LORD? for this thing wrath is upon thee\n from before the LORD.\n\n=2.= _Jehu the son of Hanani_] He must have been an old man at this\ntime, for he had prophesied against Baasha (1 Kings xvi. 1), since\nwhose reign two kings had ruled in Israel, viz., Omri (12 years) and\nAhab (22 years). It appears, however, as if the Chronicler ignored or\noverlooked 1 Kings xvi. 1, for in 2 Chronicles xvi. 7 Hanani, Jehu\u2019s\nfather, is mentioned rebuking Asa, Jehoshaphat\u2019s father. The two\npassages, in Kings and Chronicles, are not hopelessly irreconcilable,\nbut together they yield a very odd and improbable sequence: the son\nactive in Baasha\u2019s reign, the father in Asa\u2019s, and again after some 40\nyears the son in Jehoshaphat\u2019s time!\n\n_and love them that hate the LORD_] Compare Psalms cxxxix. 21, 22.\nActually, of course, Ahab even in this narrative appears as an adherent\nof Jehovah, whose prophets he consults. The phrase \u201cthem that hate the\nLORD\u201d reflects the Chronicler\u2019s view of north Israel.\n\n_for this thing_] Israel (in the Chronicler\u2019s eyes) being wholly and\nutterly bad, apostate from Jehovah, Jehoshaphat\u2019s alliance with Ahab\nhad to be construed as a most serious sin which should meet with severe\npunishment.\n\n_wrath is upon thee_] the impending visitation of anger comes to pass\nin the invasion of the Moabite and Ammonite tribes described in chapter\nxx. For \u201cwrath\u201d (Hebrew _\u1e33e\u1e63eph_) compare 2 Kings iii. 27, Revised\nVersion margin.\n\n \u00b3Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou\n hast put away the Asheroth out of the land, and hast set thine\n heart to seek God.\n\n=3.= _good things_] Compare xii. 12 (note).\n\n_the Asheroth_] plural of \u201cAsherah\u201d; compare notes on xiv. 3, and\nxv. 16.\n\n\n =4\u201211= (no parallel in Kings).\n JEHOSHAPHAT\u2019S HOME POLICY FOR INSTRUCTION IN THE LAW\n AND ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.\n\n\n=4\u201211.= This section has already been discussed in connection with xvii.\n7\u20129, where see the head-note. Compare also the Introduction \u00a7\u00a07, p. li.\n\n \u2074And Jehoshaphat dwelt at Jerusalem: and he went out again\n among the people from Beer-sheba to the hill country of Ephraim,\n and brought them back unto the LORD, the God of their fathers.\n\n=4.= _Beer-sheba_] Compare note on 1 Chronicles iv. 28.\n\n_brought them back_] Some further measures against idolatry seem to be\nmeant.\n\n \u2075And he set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities\n of Judah, city by city, \u2076and said to the judges, Consider what\n ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD; and _he is_\n with you in the judgement\u00b9. \u2077Now therefore let the fear of the\n LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity\n with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of\n gifts.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in giving judgement_ Hebrew _in the matter of\n judgement_.\n\n=5.= _And he set judges_] Compare verse 11 \u201calso the Levites shall be\nofficers\u201d; and Deuteronomy xvi. 18 \u201cjudges and officers shalt thou make\nthee in all thy gates.\u201d\n\nIn the earliest days justice was administered in Israel, as among the\nBedouin of to-day, probably by all heads of families and (in difficult\ncases) by the one head who was distinguished above the rest for\nimpartiality and for knowledge of tribal custom. In later days when\nIsrael was settled in Canaan the \u201celders of the cities\u201d and the \u201celders\nof the priests\u201d exercised the same functions. The priests also at the\ngreat shrines, by their responses in matters brought for the decision\nof the Divine oracle, exercised an important part in the development\nand administration of law in Israel. In the monarchic period the King\nacted as a judge before whom difficult and important disputes seem to\nhave been brought. His willingness to hear such cases (2 Samuel viii.\n15, xv. 3 ff.) and his wisdom in deciding them (1 Kings iii. 9, etc.)\nevidently affected his authority and popularity to no small extent.\nIn the present passage it is noteworthy that the King delegates this\nauthority even in Jerusalem.\n\nJehoshaphat\u2019s measures, as here described, are twofold, (1)\u00a0to\nestablish judges throughout the cities of Judah (compare Deuteronomy\nxvi. 18), (2)\u00a0to establish (in accordance with Deuteronomy xvii. 8 ff.)\na kind of court of appeal in Jerusalem itself.\n\n \u2078Moreover in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites and\n the priests, and of the heads of the fathers\u2019 _houses_ of Israel,\n for the judgement of the LORD, and for controversies. And they\n returned to Jerusalem.\n\n=8.= _for the judgement of the LORD, and for controversies_] By the\nfirst expression the Chronicler refers to religious as contrasted with\ncivil cases (_controversies_), or perhaps more generally to matters\nregarding which some decision could be found in the Law of the Lord\n(i.e. in the Pentateuch, according to the Chronicler\u2019s belief). The\nsecond phrase (\u201ccontroversies\u201d) probably means civil disputes for which\narbitration, rather than a strictly legal decision, was suitable.\n\n_And they returned to Jerusalem_] These words are certainly a textual\nmistake. Read either, =And they= (the judges appointed by Jehoshaphat)\n=dwelt in Jerusalem=: i.e. the most difficult cases could _always_ be\ndecided in Jerusalem, because the judges were always there. Or read,\n_and for the controversies_ =of the inhabitants of Jerusalem= (compare\nLXX.). In either case the change in Hebrew is very slight.\n\n \u2079And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of\n the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.\n\n=9.= _a perfect heart_] i.e. a heart undivided in its allegiance;\ncompare 1 Chronicles xii. 38. The judges were not to attempt to combine\nthe service of God with the taking of bribes.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And whensoever any controversy shall come to you from your\n brethren that dwell in their cities, between blood and blood,\n between law and commandment, statutes and judgements, ye shall\n warn them, that they be not guilty towards the LORD, and so\n wrath come upon you and upon your brethren: this do, and ye\n shall not be guilty.\n\n=10.= _between blood and blood_] To decide between one kind of\nblood-shedding and another, i.e. between manslaughter and murder.\nDeuteronomy xvii. 8.\n\n_between law and commandment_] To decide what particular ordinance\napplies to a particular case.\n\n_ye shall warn them_] Compare Ezekiel iii. 17\u201221.\n\n_wrath_] Hebrew _\u1e33e\u1e63eph_; see note on verse 2.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And, behold, Amariah the chief priest is over you in all\n matters of the LORD; and Zebadiah the son of Ishmael, the ruler\n of the house of Judah, in all the king\u2019s matters: also the\n Levites shall be officers before you. Deal courageously\u00b9, and\n the LORD be with the good.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Be strong and do_.\n\n=11.= _Amariah_] Perhaps the one mentioned in 1 Chronicles vi. 11 [v.\n37, Hebrew].\n\n_matters of the LORD_] i.e. in all religious and ritual questions.\nContrast _the king\u2019s matters_, i.e. civil cases, such probably as\nquestions of taxation, military service, and so forth.\n\n_officers before you_] i.e. waiting to execute your instructions.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XX.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE INVASION OF THE MOABITES AND THEIR ALLIES.\n\nVerses 1\u201230 of this chapter present an edifying tale of a miraculous\nvictory gained by Jehoshaphat over an invading horde of desert tribes,\na victory gained solely through prayer to Jehovah and without a single\nblow being struck by a Judean soldier. The whole narrative is an\nadmirable example of midrashic narrative, and should be compared with\nxiv. 9\u201215 and xiii. 3\u201220, where see notes. Regarding the possibility of\nan historical foundation for the tale, see the Introduction \u00a7\u00a07, xlix,\nl, and compare G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_,\npp. 272, 273.\n\n \u00b9And it came to pass after this, that the children of Moab, and\nthe children of Ammon, and with them some of the Ammonites\u00b9, came\nagainst Jehoshaphat to battle.\n\n \u00b9 Perhaps an error for _Meunim_. So the Septuagint See chapter\n xxvi. 7.\n\n=1.= _some of the Ammonites_] Read, =some of the Meunim=. They were\nan Arabian people whose name seems to be preserved in that of _Ma\u2018\u012bn_,\nan Edomitic village (south-east of Petra) on the pilgrim route between\nDamascus and Mecca. The LXX. here, as also in xxvi. 7; 1 Chronicles iv.\n41, has \u039c\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 (\u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9), and probably intended thereby the Minaeans,\na people who established a powerful kingdom in South Arabia (see the\nnote on 1 Chronicles iv. 41).\n\n \u00b2Then there came some that told Jehoshaphat, saying, There\n cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea from\n Syria; and, behold, they be in Hazazon-tamar (the same is\n En-gedi).\n\n=2.= _from Syria_] So also LXX., but undoubtedly the correct reading is\n=from Edom=. Confusion of two letters of almost identical shape in\nHebrew (a \u05e8 for a \u05d3) accounts for the difference.\n\n_Hazazon-tamar_] Genesis xiv. 7. The name seems to describe the place\nas _stony_ and as containing _palm-trees_. It is in fact an oasis.\n\n_the same is En-gedi_] Compare G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of\nthe Holy Land_ as quoted above, and B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 171.\nEn-gedi is on the west coast of the Dead Sea at a point where a rugged\npass leads up into the hill country of Judah.\n\n \u00b3And Jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek unto the\n LORD; and he proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah. \u2074And Judah\n gathered themselves together, to seek _help_ of the LORD: even\n out of all the cities of Judah they came to seek the LORD.\n\n=3.= _proclaimed a fast_] A fast involved the assembling of the people;\n1 Kings xxi. 9, 12; Jeremiah xxxvi. 6, 9; Joel ii. 15. Special fasts\nwere proclaimed for war, famine, or any other calamity or serious event.\n\n\n =5\u201213= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE PRAYER OF JEHOSHAPHAT.\n\nThis prayer should be compared with Solomon\u2019s (vi. 14 ff.).\n\n \u2075And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of Judah and\n Jerusalem, in the house of the LORD, before the new court;\n\n=5.= _stood_] Rather, =rose up=.\n\n_before the new court_] The Temple of Solomon, strictly speaking,\nhad only one court, but the Chronicler speaks of it in terms which\nseem more appropriate to the post-exilic Temple with its inner and\nouter courts (see the note on iv. 9). The terms he uses, however,\nare unhappily vague and it is not quite easy to determine the precise\nmeaning. Thus here, the word used for \u201ccourt\u201d is _\u1e25\u0101\u1e63\u0113r_, which\naccording to iv. 9 ought to mean the inner court, the court of the\npriests, as distinguished from the outer court of the people, the\n\u201c_\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_.\u201d On this view, the phrase means that Jehoshaphat was in the\n_\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_, standing not _in_ but _before_ the _\u1e25\u0101\u1e63\u0113r_ of the priests.\nBut the inner court must be the old original court, and it seems quite\nimpossible that the Chronicler, as he does here, should describe it\nas _new_: that adjective can be applicable only to a secondary, outer,\ncourt. We must therefore suppose that he here uses the word _\u1e25\u0101\u1e63\u0113r_ for\nthe court he elsewhere designates by the special term _\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_. The\ncorrect interpretation then is that Jehoshaphat stood _before_ the new,\nthe outer court, i.e. he stood at the inner side of the outer court\nwith his back towards the inner court and looking out towards the\ncontaining wall and the entrances where the people were grouped. Both\ninterpretations come to much the same thing, but the point of language\ndeserves attention.\n\n \u2076and he said, O LORD, the God of our fathers, art not thou God\n in heaven? and art not thou ruler over all the kingdoms of the\n nations? and in thine hand is power and might, so that none is\n able to withstand thee.\n\n=6.= _art not thou God_] Compare Joshua ii. 11.\n\n_ruler over all the kingdoms_] Compare Psalms xxii. 28.\n\n_is power_] compare xiv. 11 (Asa\u2019s prayer).\n\n \u2077Didst not thou, O our God, drive out the inhabitants of this\n land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of\n Abraham thy friend for ever? \u2078And they dwelt therein, and have\n built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name, saying,\n\n=7.= _drive out_] compare Deuteronomy ix.\u00a05.\n\n_thy friend_] compare Isaiah xli.\u00a08.\n\n \u2079If evil come upon us, the sword\u00b9, judgement, or pestilence, or\n famine, we will stand before this house, and before thee, (for\n thy name is in this house,) and cry unto thee in our affliction,\n and thou wilt hear and save.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the sword of judgement_.\n\n=9.= _the sword, judgement_] Render with margin =the sword of judgement=\n(compare Ezekiel xiv. 17).\n\n \u00b9\u2070And now, behold, the children of Ammon and Moab and mount\n Seir, whom thou wouldest not let Israel invade, when they came\n out of the land of Egypt, but they turned aside from them, and\n destroyed them not;\n\n=10.= _mount Seir_] Here, and in verse 23 in the enumeration of\nthe allied peoples, \u201cMount Seir\u201d which was situated in the Edomite\nterritory takes the place of the \u201cMeunim\u201d of verse 1. It is clear,\nhowever, that the same contingent is meant, and no difficulty arises\nif Meunim denotes people from the Edomite district near the town Ma\u2018\u012bn:\nsee note on verse 1. Even if the south Arabian Minaeans were meant,\nit might be said that the two peoples were cognate and that Minaean\ninvaders in passing through Mount Seir would probably bring along with\nthem Edomite kinsmen. The region loosely denoted by Mount Seir was\npractically synonymous with Edom, extending from the south of the Dead\nSea to the head of the Gulf of Akaba.\n\n_whom thou wouldest not_, etc.] Compare Deuteronomy ii. 4, 5, 9, 19;\nsee also Numbers xx. 14\u201221.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9behold, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of thy\n possession, which thou hast given us to inherit.\n\n=11.= _thy possession_] A \u201cpossession\u201d means that which one takes\npossession of by the sword. Canaan is God\u2019s \u201cpossession\u201d because it was\nconquered by His arm (Psalms xliv.\u00a03).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2O our God, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might\n against this great company that cometh against us; neither know\n we what to do: but our eyes are upon thee.\n\n=12.= _our eyes are upon thee_] Compare xiv.\u00a011.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And all Judah stood before the LORD, with their little ones,\n their wives, and their children.\n\n=13.= _their little ones ... and their children_] Compare xxxi. 18,\n\u201ctheir little ones ... and their sons and their daughters.\u201d \u201cLittle\nones\u201d (Hebrew _\u1e6daph_) seems always to mean quite small children.\n\n\n =14\u201219= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE PROPHECY OF JAHAZIEL.\n\n \u00b9\u2074Then upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah,\n the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, the Levite, of the\n sons of Asaph, came the spirit of the LORD in the midst of the\n congregation;\n\n=14.= _Jahaziel_] Nothing is known of him beyond what is recorded in\nthis chapter. His name is significant (\u201cGod giveth visions\u201d).\n\n \u00b9\u2075and he said, Hearken ye, all Judah, and ye inhabitants of\n Jerusalem, and thou king Jehoshaphat: thus saith the LORD unto\n you, Fear not ye, neither be dismayed by reason of this great\n multitude; for the battle is not yours, but God\u2019s.\n\n=15.= _the battle is not yours, but God\u2019s_] Jahaziel gives a special\nturn to the general truth, \u201cThe battle is the Lord\u2019s\u201d (David to Goliath,\n1 Samuel xvii. 47).\n\n \u00b9\u2076To-morrow go ye down against them: behold, they come up by the\n ascent of Ziz; and ye shall find them at the end of the valley,\n before the wilderness of Jeruel.\n\n=16.= _the ascent of Ziz_] The exact positions of this and of the\n\u201cvalley\u201d and of the \u201cwilderness\u201d mentioned in this verse are uncertain,\nbut probably the invaders followed not the direct road from En-gedi to\nBeth-lehem, but one a little to the left of this.\n\n_the valley_] (Hebrew _na\u1e25al_), strictly \u201cravine\u201d or \u201cwater-course.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2077Ye shall not need to fight in this _battle_: set yourselves,\n stand ye still, and see the salvation of the LORD with you, O\n Judah and Jerusalem: fear not, nor be dismayed: to-morrow go out\n against them; for the LORD is with you. \u00b9\u2078And Jehoshaphat bowed\n his head with his face to the ground: and all Judah and the\n inhabitants of Jerusalem fell down before the LORD, worshipping\n the LORD.\n\n=17.= _stand ye still, and see the salvation of the LORD_] This\nsaying magnificently expresses the very essence of this story of\ndeliverance won by faith. And further it reveals the deepest aspect\nof the Chronicler\u2019s attitude to life. It is the living heart of the\nwhole history as he tells it. We are impatient of the mechanical and\ngrandiose elements in his work, because the taste for such exaggeration\nhas passed away and the necessity for laying stress on the ritual of\nreligion has little relevance for our times. But all criticism of the\nbooks of Chronicles is superficial which fails to see that the writer\nis inspired by a splendid faith in God and a grand determination to\nmaintain the religious attitude as the one ultimate key to life\u2019s\nmeaning. The present story is intended to assert the value of reliance\nupon God, in the midst of overwhelming peril still \u201ctrust in God and\ndo the right\u201d; and to assert this in the strongest conceivable terms.\nThus it is related that the victory was gained without any need for\nJehoshaphat\u2019s _grande arm\u00e9e_ of 1,160,000 men! Turn from the tale to\nthe circumstances of the post-exilic Jewish community, and the heroism\nof such teaching leaps to light. It is when we are surrounded by\nunscrupulous and powerful foes and have not 1000 soldiers, far less\n1,000,000, that the reality of our trust in God and goodness is put\nto the test. \u201cAye,\u201d says the Chronicler, \u201cbut, if like Jehoshaphat you\n_had_ 1,000,000, it is still the supreme duty of man to rely on God.\u201d\nGreat teaching, and greatly followed by the enfeebled yet indomitable\nJews. While they were thus helpless, Jehovah wrought for Israel, even\nas the Chronicler relates that He destroyed the enemies of Jehoshaphat\nin the wilderness of Jeruel. \u201cThe Jews stood still and saw the working\nout of their deliverance; great Empires wrestled together\u2015\u2015Babylonian,\nPersian, Greek, and Roman\u2015\u2015like Moab, Ammon, and Edom, in the agony\nof the death struggle: and over all the tumult of battle Israel heard\nthe voice of Jehovah, \u2018The battle is not yours, but God\u2019s; ... set\nyourselves, stand ye still, and see the deliverance of Jehovah with\nyou, O Judah and Jerusalem\u2019\u201d (Bennett, _Chronicles_, p. 387). Certainly\nthe post-exilic Jews were so weak that trust in their own armed power\nwas at almost all times manifestly absurd, yet this does not mean\nthat they were thereby driven to the policy of quiet faith. There was\nan alternative ever before them\u2015\u2015despair and unbelief: _that_ they\nresolutely refused. Such were the stern realities which ought to be\nweighed when we seek to realise the moral and spiritual worth of the\nChronicler and his doctrines.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And the Levites, of the children of the Kohathites and of the\n children of the Korahites, stood up to praise the LORD, the God\n of Israel, with an exceeding loud voice.\n\n=19.= _the Korahites_] The Korahites were a branch of the Kohathites (1\nChronicles vi. 22 [7, Hebrew], 37, 38 [22, 23, Hebrew]); the Chronicler\nsimply defines his first statement; those who stood up to praise were\nKohathites by clan, Korahites by family.\n\n\n =20\u201225= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE DELIVERANCE.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And they rose early in the morning, and went forth into the\n wilderness of Tekoa: and as they went forth, Jehoshaphat stood\n and said, Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem;\n believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established;\n believe his prophets,\n\n=20.= _Tekoa_] The modern _Te\u1e33u\u2018a_, a ruin on a hill 2790 feet above\nthe sea, about six miles south of Beth-lehem. It was an ancient place;\nxi. 6; 1 Chronicles ii. 24; 2 Samuel xiv. 2; Amos i. 1. The \u201cwilderness\nof Tekoa\u201d means that part of the \u201cwilderness of Judah\u201d which was near\nTekoa.\n\n_believe ... so shall ye be established_] Compare Isaiah vii. 9, \u201cIf\nye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established.\u201d In both\nplaces there is a play on the words in the Hebrew; \u201cbelieve\u201d and \u201cbe\nestablished\u201d representing two voices of the same verb _ha\u2019am\u012bn\u016b ...\nt\u0113\u2019\u0101m\u0113n\u016b_.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9so shall ye prosper. And when he had taken counsel with the\n people, he appointed them that should sing unto the LORD, and\n praise the beauty\u00b9 of holiness, as they went out before the army,\n and say, Give thanks unto the LORD; for his mercy _endureth_ for\n ever.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in the beauty of holiness_.\n\n=21.= _them that should sing unto the LORD, and praise_] Compare the\npreliminaries of the Battle of the Standard fought between the Scots\nand English in 1138.\n\n_the beauty of holiness_] Render =in holy attire=, i.e. in priestly\ngarments. Compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 29 (note).\n\n_before the army_] Contrast Joshua vi. 7, 9 (the armed men precede the\nArk).\n\n_Give thanks_] compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 41.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And when they began to sing and to praise, the LORD set liers\n in wait against the children of Ammon, Moab, and mount Seir,\n which were come against Judah; and they were smitten.\n\n=22.= _the LORD set liers in wait_] Comparing Joshua viii. 2, where\nJoshua is bidden by God to set an ambush, we might suppose that the\npresent phrase implies simply that the Lord suggested to Jehoshaphat\nthe plan of setting an ambush. Such a view, however, seems antagonistic\nto verse 17, where the Judeans are told only to stand still and see the\nsalvation wrought by God; and indeed it would detract immensely from\nthe value of the tale as an awe-inspiring marvel. It is preferable\nto suppose that certain supernatural Divine agents were meant by the\nChronicler. If the tradition has an historical basis, some sudden\nassault was probably made by the inhabitants of the invaded district\nbefore the main army from Jerusalem arrived (see the Introduction pp.\nxlix, l). G.\u00a0A. Smith (_Historical Geography of the Holy Land_, p. 272)\npoints out that the country between En-gedi and Tekoa is well suited\nfor attack by surprise.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3For the children of Ammon and Moab stood up against the\n inhabitants of mount Seir, utterly to slay and destroy them: and\n when they had made an end of the inhabitants of Seir, every one\n helped to destroy another.\n\n=23.= _For the children of Ammon_] Render, =And the children of Ammon=.\nThe sudden attack of the \u201cliers in wait\u201d caused a panic and a suspicion\nof treachery among the allies; so at Gideon\u2019s surprise of Midian every\nman turned his sword against his fellow (Judges vii. 22).\n\n_utterly to slay_] Literally _to devote_, or _put to the ban_ (Hebrew\n\u1e25erem); i.e. to undertake the partial or total destruction of the\nfoe and his possessions as a sacred duty to be performed in honour of\nGod\u2015\u2015compare Leviticus xxvii. 28, 29, and Driver\u2019s note on Exodus xxii.\n20 in this series. Compare 1 Chronicles iv. 41.\n\n \u00b2\u2074And when Judah came to the watch-tower of the wilderness, they\n looked upon the multitude; and, behold, they were dead bodies\n fallen to the earth, and there were none that escaped.\n\n=24.= _to the watch-tower_] Rather \u201c=to the outlook-point=,\u201d i.e. some\nspot from which they were able to survey the scene of the disaster in\nthe valley by which the enemy were advancing.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And when Jehoshaphat and his people came to take the spoil\n of them, they found among them in abundance both riches and\n dead bodies\u00b9, and precious jewels, which they stripped off for\n themselves, more than they could carry away: and they were three\n days in taking of the spoil, it was so much.\n\n \u00b9 According to some ancient authorities, _garments_.\n\n=25.= _they found among them in abundance both riches and dead bodies_]\nThe Hebrew text is faulty. Following the LXX. \u03b5\u1f56\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03ba\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1, read probably =they found much cattle and goods\nand garments=.\n\n\n =26\u201230= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE SEQUEL OF THE DELIVERANCE.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And on the fourth day they assembled themselves in the valley\n of Beracah\u00b9; for there they blessed the LORD: therefore the name\n of that place was called The valley of Beracah, unto this day.\n \u00b2\u2077Then they returned, every man of Judah and Jerusalem, and\n Jehoshaphat in the forefront of them, to go again to Jerusalem\n with joy; for the LORD had made them to rejoice over their\n enemies. \u00b2\u2078And they came to Jerusalem with psalteries and harps\n and trumpets unto the house of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 That is, _Blessing_.\n\n=26.= _valley of Beracah_] A deserted village _Bereik\u016bt_ (south of\nTekoa) where there are some very ancient ruins seems to preserve the\nname. It is possible that the \u201cvalley of Jehoshaphat\u201d mentioned by\nJoel (iii. [iv., Hebrew] 2) is to be identified with the scene of\nJehoshaphat\u2019s deliverance.\n\n \u00b2\u2079And the fear of God was on all the kingdoms of the countries,\n when they heard that the LORD fought against the enemies of\n Israel. \u00b3\u2070So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet: for his God\n gave him rest round about.\n\n=29.= _was on all_] Rather, =came upon all=; compare xiv. 14, xvii. 10.\n\n_the kingdoms of the countries_] a characteristic phrase with the\nChronicler; compare xii. 8, xvii. 10 and 1 Chronicles xxix. 30.\n\n\n =31\u201234= (= 1 Kings xxii. 41\u201245).\n THE SUMMARY OF JEHOSHAPHAT\u2019S REIGN.\n\nThere are several variations of text between Kings and Chronicles here;\nand in particular the Chronicler omits the statement that Jehoshaphat\nmade peace with Israel.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And Jehoshaphat reigned over Judah: he was thirty and five\n years old when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and five\n years in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name was Azubah the\n daughter of Shilhi.\n\n=31.= _reigned over Judah_] In Kings, _began to reign over Judah in the\nfourth year of Ahab king of Israel_. The Chronicler will not date the\naccession of a southern king by the year of an ungodly northern king.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2And he walked in the way of Asa his father, and turned not\n aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the\n LORD.\n\n=32.= _of Asa his father_] compare xvii. 3 (note).\n\n \u00b3\u00b3Howbeit the high places were not taken away; neither as yet\n had the people set their hearts unto the God of their fathers.\n\n=33.= _the high places_] Precisely the contrary is asserted in xvii. 6,\nwhere see note. On the meaning of \u201chigh place\u201d see the note on xv. 17.\n\n_neither as yet had the people set their hearts_] compare xii. 14.\nIn Kings it is said particularly that the people sacrificed and burnt\nincense at the high places.\n\n \u00b3\u2074Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, first and last,\n behold, they are written in the history\u00b9 of Jehu the son of\n Hanani, which is inserted\u00b2 in the book of the kings of Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _words_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _who is mentioned_.\n\n=34.= _Jehu the son of Hanani_] See xix. 2 (note).\n\n_which is inserted_] Chronicles of different events were joined\ntogether to form one continuous Chronicle; i.e. the _history of\nJehu_ means a special section of the Book of the Kings of Israel\u2015\u2015see\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a05, p. xxxii.\n\n\n =35\u201237= (compare 1 Kings xxii. 48, 49).\n THE DESTRUCTION OF JEHOSHAPHAT\u2019S FLEET.\n\nThe Chronicler gives a somewhat different account of this incident\nfrom that in Kings. According to the latter, Jehoshaphat made ships of\nTarshish (i.e. a particular kind of vessel) to sail to Ophir for gold,\nand _refused_ the offer of Ahaziah to cooperate in the enterprise. It\nis then added that the enterprise failed, as the ships were wrecked\nat Ezion-geber. The Chronicler, on the other hand, expressly asserts\nthat Jehoshaphat \u201cjoined himself\u201d with the wicked Ahaziah in this naval\nenterprise, and interprets the wreck as a Divine punishment for the sin\nof the alliance (the disaster being foretold by a prophet). Further he\nhas misunderstood the term \u201cships of Tarshish\u201d (see note, verse 36) and\nmakes Tarshish, and not Ophir, the object of the voyage. The whole is\nsaid to constitute an instructive example of the freedom with which\nthe narrative in Kings could be handled in the interests of religious\nteaching. The second divergence, \u201cships to Tarshish,\u201d is only an error\nof ignorance, but the first is important. Without, however, denying\nthat the Chronicler has been careful to point the moral of his tale,\nit may be urged that his version is not obtained simply by an arbitrary\nalteration of Kings, but rather reflects an _independent_ account of\nthe affair, perhaps more reliable than that in Kings. Almost certainly\nJehoshaphat was still virtually subject to Israel, and the Chronicler\u2019s\ntradition may be true to fact in representing him as partner with\nAhaziah from the start of the enterprise. At least the possibility must\nnot be ruled out because the story suited the Chronicler\u2019s religious\npredilections. Again it is quite improbable that the story of the seer\nof Mareshah is wholly an invention of the Chronicler (see notes on\nverse 37). The passage therefore yields some evidence of access to\ntraditions other than those in Kings; and their value deserves to be\nfairly considered.\n\n \u00b3\u2075And after this did Jehoshaphat king of Judah join himself\n with Ahaziah king of Israel; the same did very wickedly: \u00b3\u2076and\n he joined himself with him to make ships to go to Tarshish: and\n they made the ships in Ezion-geber.\n\n=36.= _ships to go to Tarshish_] In Kings, _ships of Tarshish to go\nto Ophir_: compare ix. 21 (= 1 Kings x. 22), note. In both passages\nthe reading of Kings, \u201cships (or \u2018navy\u2019) _of_ Tarshish,\u201d i.e. large\nsea-going ships (compare Psalms xlviii. 7), is correct, because\n(1)\u00a0Ezion-geber was a port for vessels sailing eastward, while Tarshish\nwas in the west, (2)\u00a0gold, the object of the voyage (compare 1 Kings\nxxii. 48), came from Ophir (viii. 18; 1 Kings ix. 28, x. 11; Psalms\nxlv. 9).\n\n_Tarshish_] compare 1 Chronicles i. 7 (note).\n\n_Ezion-geber_] compare viii. 17 (note).\n\n \u00b3\u2077Then Eliezer the son of Dodavahu of Mareshah prophesied\n against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself\n with Ahaziah, the LORD hath destroyed\u00b9 thy works. And the ships\n were broken, that they were not able to go to Tarshish.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _made a breach in_.\n\n=37.= _Then Eliezer ... of Mareshah prophesied_] Cook (_Expository\nTimes_, August, 1906, p. 191) points out how suitable Mareshah is\nas the home of a prophet antagonistic to Jehoshaphat. The town was\nsituated in the Shephelah (see xi. 8, note; and also Peters and\nThiersch, _Painted Tombs in the Necropolis of Marissa_); and would be\nin close touch with the Philistine and Edomite (Arabian) districts,\nwhich were \u201cstirred up\u201d to revolt in the time of Jehoram, Jehoshaphat\u2019s\nson. Note also the association of Mareshah in the tradition of Zerah\u2019s\ninvasion in Asa\u2019s reign (xiv. 10). It is unlikely that the Chronicler\nwould have \u201cinvented\u201d Mareshah as the home of Eliezer; rather is it\nreasonable to infer that he is utilising an old tradition, independent\nof Kings and at least noteworthy for its consistency.\n\n_Dodavahu_] The LXX. (Lucian), \u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, indicates that the original\nform of the name was _Dodiah_ \u05d3\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05d4, signifying probably \u201ckinsman of\nJehovah\u201d; for euphemistic reasons this was softened to _Dodavahu_.\nThe name therefore is almost certainly characteristic of an early\nperiod, and is not such as would naturally occur to the Chronicler\u2019s\nimagination. Here again then we find reason for thinking that the\nChronicler was relying on the current form of an old tradition (see\nG.\u00a0B. Gray, _Hebrew Proper Names_, pp. 62, 232).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXI.\n\n\n =1= (= 1 Kings xxii. 50).\n JEHOSHAPHAT SUCCEEDED BY JEHORAM.\n\n\n =2\u20124= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE NAMES AND THE FATE OF THE OTHER SONS OF JEHOSHAPHAT.\n\n=2\u20124.= Presumably the Chronicler has drawn the information given in\nthese verses from traditional sources. The details of the names of the\nbrethren, their possessions, and their massacre by Jehoram are not\nlikely to be the product of the Chronicler\u2019s unaided imagination.\n\n \u00b9And Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers, and was buried with\n his fathers in the city of David; and Jehoram his son reigned\n in his stead. \u00b2And he had brethren the sons of Jehoshaphat,\n Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael,\n and Shephatiah: all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of\n Israel.\n\n=2.= _brethren the sons of Jehoshaphat_] It was necessary to define\n_brethren_, for the word by itself means no more than \u201ckinsmen\u201d;\ncompare 1 Chronicles xii. 3 (note).\n\n_Azariah_] Since this name (with a slight variation of spelling) is\nrepeated in the list it is probable that the text is corrupt. Yet the\nerror may be no more than the omission of some epithet which\ndistinguished one Azariah from the other in the original text of the\nverse. The LXX. gives no help.\n\n_king of Israel_] Compare xi. 3, note.\n\n \u00b3And their father gave them great gifts, of silver, and of gold,\n and of precious things, with fenced cities in Judah: but the\n kingdom gave he to Jehoram, because he was the firstborn.\n\n=3.= _their father gave them_] Rehoboam did the same; xi. 23.\n\n_precious things_] Hebrew _migd\u0101n\u014dth_; compare xxxii. 23.\n\n \u2074Now when Jehoram was risen up over the kingdom of his father,\n and had strengthened himself, he slew all his brethren with the\n sword, and divers also of the princes of Israel.\n\n=4.= _strengthened himself_] Compare i. 1 (note).\n\n\n =5\u20127= (= 2 Kings viii. 17\u201219).\n THE EVIL CHARACTER OF JEHORAM\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u2075Jehoram was thirty and two years old when he began to reign;\n and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. \u2076And he walked in the\n way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab: for he had\n the daughter of Ahab to wife: and he did that which was evil in\n the sight of the LORD.\n\n=6.= _of Ahab_] Compare xviii. 1 (note).\n\n \u2077Howbeit the LORD would not destroy the house of David, because\n of the covenant that he had made with David, and as he promised\n to give a lamp to him and to his children alway.\n\n=7.= _the house of David_] In 2 Kings _Judah_, a term sparingly used in\nChronicles; compare xi. 3 (note).\n\n_a lamp_] Thus figuratively applied the Hebrew word is written _n\u012br_;\nordinarily \u201clamp\u201d is _n\u0113r_ in Hebrew.\n\n\n =8\u201210= (= 2 Kings viii. 20\u201222).\n THE REVOLT OF EDOM.\n\n \u2078In his days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, and\n made a king over themselves.\n\n=8.= _In his days Edom revolted_] From 1 Chronicles xviii. 11\u201213\n(compare 2 Samuel viii. 13 f.) it appears that Edom was subjugated in\nthe reign of David, and it seems to have remained so until Jehoram\u2019s\nreign. If, as is probable, the _Meunim_ are to be reckoned an Edomitic\ntribe (see the notes on xx. 1, 10), Edom may have made a vain attempt\nto throw off the Judean suzerainty in Jehoshaphat\u2019s time, and this\nwould suit the remark in 1 Kings xxii. 47 \u201cAnd there was no king in\nEdom: a deputy was king\u201d\u2015\u2015i.e. a nominee of Jehoshaphat. Moreover the\ntradition of Jehoshaphat\u2019s shipbuilding at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of\nAkaba implies the maintenance of his hold over Edom.\n\n \u2079Then Jehoram passed over with his captains, and all his\n chariots with him: and he rose up by night, and smote the\n Edomites which compassed him about, and the captains of the\n chariots.\n\n=9.= _Then Jehoram passed over_] In Kings \u201cpassed over _to Zair_\u201d (the\nplace is not otherwise known; for a suggestion that the Moabite _Zoar_\nshould be read, see _Encyclopedia Britannica_ s.v. _Moab_, p. 631 _ad\nfin._). Without the addition of a place name the verb \u201cpassed over\u201d in\nChronicles is somewhat awkward. It is possible that the Chronicler used\nit in the meaning that Jehoram with a vanguard of chariots _passed by_\nhis main body of \u201cthe people\u201d to take the lead. Although the text in\n1 Kings viii. 21 appears to have suffered some corruption, it is fairly\nclear that Jehoram pushed on with his chariots as a vanguard, was\nhemmed in by the Edomites, and, though he succeeded in cutting his way\nout by a night attack, his main army had dispersed in the belief that\nthe king and the chariots were cut off and lost.\n\n_and the captains of the chariots_] The clause is governed by the verb\n\u201ccompassed\u201d (read perhaps _el_ for _eth_ in the Hebrew).\n\n \u00b9\u2070So Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah, unto this day:\n then did Libnah revolt at the same time from under his hand:\n because he had forsaken the LORD, the God of his fathers.\n\n=10.= _then did Libnah revolt at the same time_] The exact position\nof Libnah is not known, but it was in the south of Judah, probably not\nfar from Lachish (_Tell el-Hesi_) and the Edomite territory. The active\nhostility of the Edomitic (Arabian) and Philistine districts about\nthis period afforded an opportunity to any elements of discontent in\nthe townships of southern Judah; see the note on xxvi. 7. Probably\nthe population of Libnah included many Edomite and Philistine families,\ncompare the Peshit\u1e6da rendering of this clause, viz. \u201cThen did _the\nEdomites who dwell in Libnah_ revolt.\u201d\n\n_became he had forsaken_, etc.] Not in Kings; a moralistic comment by\nthe Chronicler.\n\n\n =11\u201215= (not in Kings).\n JEHORAM\u2019S SINS AND ELIJAH\u2019S WRITTEN DENUNCIATION.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Moreover he made high places in the mountains\u00b9 of Judah, and\n made the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, and led\u00b2\n Judah astray.\n\n \u00b9 According to some ancient authorities, _cities_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _compelled Judah thereto_.\n\n=11.= _in the mountains_] So Peshit\u1e6da, but LXX., _in the cities_. The\ndifference between the two readings in Hebrew is very small.\n\n_made ... to go a whoring_] a much used metaphor of Scripture, meaning\n_led ... into idolatry_.\n\n_led Judah astray_] Literally, _drew_ or _thrust away Judah_, i.e. from\nthe presence of Jehovah.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet,\n saying, Thus saith the LORD, the God of David thy father,\n Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy\n father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah; \u00b9\u00b3but hast walked\n in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the\n inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like as the house of\n Ahab did\u00b9; and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father\u2019s\n house, which were better than thyself:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _made to go a whoring_.\n\n=12.= _a writing_] This is the only place in which any writing of\nElijah is mentioned. Even in Jehoshaphat\u2019s reign Elijah seems to have\nbeen no longer among the living; compare 2 Kings iii. 11 (where Elisha\nseems already to have taken Elijah\u2019s place). That the writing was a\nprophecy of Elijah denouncing Jehoram in anticipation of his reign\nis not only utterly improbable, but the plain words of the Chronicler\ndo not seem even to suggest it. It is possible to suppose that some\nadaptation of words of Elijah to suit Jehoram\u2019s case was placarded by\nan unknown hand outside Jehoram\u2019s palace; but again the explanation\nseems more elaborate than the simple statement warrants. It is more\nprobable therefore that the Chronicler means plainly a letter from\nElijah, and ignores the anachronism involved in supposing the prophet\nto have been alive in Jehoram\u2019s reign. So great wickedness seemed to\nhim to require a rebuke from a well-known prophet, and it is put into\nthe mouth of Elijah, who, as the great opponent of the idolatry of\nAhab and Jezebel, seemed to be the most proper person to pronounce the\ndenunciation. The style of the letter requires a late date, and the\nauthor is perhaps the Chronicler himself. See further the Introduction\n\u00a7\u00a07, p. xlviii.\n\n \u00b9\u2074behold, the LORD will smite with a great plague\u00b9 thy people,\n and thy children, and thy wives, and all thy substance:\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _stroke_.\n\n=14.= _a great plague_] For \u201cplague\u201d compare xvi. 28, 29. Jehoram\u2019s\n\u201cplague\u201d is described in verses 16, 17.\n\n_thy substance_] Genesis xii. 5; the Hebrew word includes both \u201cgoods\u201d\nand \u201cchattels\u201d (i.e. live stock).\n\n \u00b9\u2075and thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels,\n until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness, day by day\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _year after year_.\n\n=15.= _day by day_] margin, =year after year=; a prolonged sickness.\n\n\n =16, 17= (no parallel in Kings).\n THE INVASION OF THE PHILISTINES AND ARABIANS.\n\nThe Chronicler\u2019s theory of life demanded that disasters should mark the\nclose of this wicked reign, and in view of the licence which marks the\nChronicler\u2019s reconstruction of the history, it must be allowed that a\nraid by the very peoples who had paid tribute to Jehoshaphat (xvii. 11)\nmay be only a conjecture to suit the requirements of his religious\nconviction. But neither the absence of the story from Kings, nor yet\nthe religious appropriateness of the attack entails its rejection as\nunhistorical. The comparative fulness and vigour of the Chronicler\u2019s\naccount of these reigns yields many suggestive indications (some\nof which have already been noted) favouring the view that he had\nbefore him valuable independent traditions of Edomite and Philistine\nhostilities against Judah which were referred to this period. That\nbeing so, the possible historicity of this tradition in verses 16, 17\nmust be admitted; and it should be noted that such a raid would be a\nmost natural sequel to Jehoram\u2019s loss of control over Edom recorded in\nverse 8.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And the LORD stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the\n Philistines, and of the Arabians which are beside the Ethiopians:\n\n=16.= _stirred up ... the spirit_] Perhaps not without the instigation\nof a prophetical party, of which Eliezer of Mareshah may have been a\nleading representative (see xx. 37). For the phrase \u201cstirred up,\u201d\ncompare xxxvi. 22 and 1 Chronicles v. 26.\n\n_which are beside the Ethiopians_] Hebrew _Cushites_\u2015\u2015probably certain\nArabian tribes, though it seems likely that the Chronicler understood\nthe name to mean the Ethiopians of Africa (see the note on _Zerah the\nEthiopian_, xiv. 9). Ancient geographical ideas were very inexact.\nHerodotus regarded all the land east of the Nile as part of Arabia.\nDistant lands are apt to be conceived of as all more or less \u201cbeside\u201d\none another. Thus the present writer has heard a Tyrolese peasant woman\nremark that she supposed \u201cRussia and Japan were both beside England.\u201d\nWe may assume that in the Chronicler\u2019s source _Arabian_ Cushites were\nmeant.\n\n \u00b9\u2077and they came up against Judah, and brake into it, and carried\n away all the substance that was found in\u00b9 the king\u2019s house, and\n his sons also, and his wives; so that there was never a son left\n him, save Jehoahaz\u00b2, the youngest of his sons.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _belonging to_.\n\n \u00b2 In chapter xxii. 1, _Ahaziah_.\n\n=17.= _and brake into it_] The proper meaning of the Hebrew verb is \u201cto\nmake a breach in a city-wall [and so take the city]\u201d; compare xxxii, 1.\nHere and in Isaiah vii. 6 the word is applied to a whole country.\n\n_in the king\u2019s house_] It is most unlikely that the invaders (if the\nraid be historical) actually entered Jerusalem, and almost certain that\nthe Chronicler did not mean to imply that they did. Probably therefore\nwe should translate, as the margin, =belonging to the king\u2019s house=.\nPart of the royal possessions and the royal household might well have\nbeen in the camp; see below, the note on xxii. 1.\n\n_Jehoahaz_] In xxii. 1 he is called _Ahaziah_, which is only another\nform of the name, the prefix _Jeho-_ of the one, and the ending _-iah_\nof the other being each the representative of the Divine name _Jehovah_.\nThe name in either form means \u201cJehovah hath taken\u201d (or \u201cgrasped\u201d).\nParallel instances are the names _Jehoshaphat_ and _Shephatiah_ (verse\n2) and _Jehonathan_ and _Nethaniah_ in xvii. 8.\n\n\n =18\u201220= (compare 2 Kings viii. 24).\n DEATH AND BURIAL OF JEHORAM.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And after all this the LORD smote him in his bowels with an\n incurable disease. \u00b9\u2079And it came to pass, in process of time, at\n the end of two years, that his bowels fell out by reason of his\n sickness, and he died of sore diseases. And his people made no\n burning for him, like the burning of his fathers.\n\n=19.= _by reason of his sickness_] LXX. \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, i.e. in the\ncourse of his sickness.\n\n_no burning_] compare xvi. 14 (note).\n\n \u00b2\u2070Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he\n reigned in Jerusalem eight years: and he departed without being\n desired; and they buried him in the city of David, but not in\n the sepulchres of the kings.\n\n=20.= _he departed without being desired_] literally _without desire_:\ni.e. he lived so that none desired him, _or_ he lived as no one desired.\nCompare LXX., \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3, literally \u201che walked without\npraise.\u201d\n\n_but not in the sepulchres of the kings_] According to Kings he \u201cwas\nburied with his fathers.\u201d Compare xxiv. 25, xxviii. 27.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXII.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 2 Kings viii. 25\u201227).\n THE REIGN OF AHAZIAH.\n\n \u00b9And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah\u00b9 his youngest\n son king in his stead: for the band of men that came with the\n Arabians to the camp had slain all the eldest. So Ahaziah the\n son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned.\n\n \u00b9 In chapter xxi. 17, _Jehoahaz_.\n\n=1.= _the inhabitants of Jerusalem_, etc.] In consequence of the great\ndisaster to the royal house, the people play a more prominent part than\nusual in deciding the succession to the throne; compare 2 Kings xxiii.\n30.\n\n_to the camp_] or _to the host_. The sense seems to be that the princes\nof the royal house were with the army in the field and were slain by\na surprise attack of a party from the Philistine and Arabian forces\n(xxi. 16). The LXX. reads, \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03ca\u03c2, i.e. apparently \u201cthe\nArabians of Mazin\u201d; but in all probability this reading is a mere error\nderived from a transliteration of the Hebrew word rendered \u201cto the\ncamp\u201d (see Torrey, _Ezra Studies_, p. 74).\n\n \u00b2Forty and two\u00b9 years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign;\n and he reigned one year in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name was\n Athaliah the daughter\u00b2 of Omri. \u00b3He also walked in the ways of\n the house of Ahab: for his mother was his counsellor to do\n wickedly.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings viii. 26, _Two and twenty_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _granddaughter_.\n\n=2.= _Forty and two years old_] The LXX. \u201ctwenty years old\u201d is\npreferable, agreeing nearly with 2 Kings viii. 26, \u201ctwo and twenty\nyears old\u201d (Hebrew and LXX.).\n\n_daughter of Omri_] So 2 Kings viii. 26, but more correctly \u201cdaughter\nof Ahab\u201d (2 Kings viii. verse 18).\n\n \u2074And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, as did\n the house of Ahab: for they were his counsellors after the death\n of his father, to his destruction.\n\n=4.= _after the death of his father_] This phrase suggests that he\nacted as regent in his father\u2019s lifetime during his father\u2019s two years\u2019\nillness.\n\n\n =5, 6= (= 2 Kings viii. 28, 29).\n THE ALLIANCE WITH JEHORAM OF ISRAEL.\n\n \u2075He walked also after their counsel, and went with Jehoram the\n son of Ahab king of Israel to war against Hazael king of Syria\n at Ramoth-gilead: and the Syrians wounded Joram.\n\n=5.= _Joram_] or =Jehoram=. The variation is unimportant.\n\n \u2076And he returned to be healed in Jezreel of the wounds\u00b9 which\n they had given him at Ramah, when he fought against Hazael king\n of Syria. And Azariah\u00b2 the son of Jehoram king of Judah went\n down to see Jehoram the son of Ahab in Jezreel, because he was\n sick.\n\n \u00b9 2 Kings viii. 29, and in the Septuagint and Syriac versions.\n The text has, _because the wounds which &c._\n\n \u00b2 In verse 1, _Ahaziah_.\n\n=6.= _Jezreel_] A city some distance to the north of Samaria, giving\nits name to the plain of Jezreel (Esdraelon). Ahab had a house there\n(1 Kings xxi. 1), probably a _country_ house judging from the incident\nof Naboth\u2019s vineyard. It is the modern _Zer\u2018in_, a town situated on\na hill commanding a wide view towards the west and the east, B\u00e4deker,\n_Palestine_\u2075, p. 244.\n\n_Ramah_] i.e. Ramoth-gilead (see xviii. 2, note).\n\n_Azariah_] Read, as margin, =Ahaziah=.\n\n\n =7\u20129= (compare 2 Kings ix. 16\u201226, 27, 28, x. 11\u201214).\n THE DEATH OF AHAZIAH.\n\n=7\u20129.= These verses give a hasty summary of the passages in Kings\nThe Chronicler\u2019s version differs in some particulars from Kings The\ndivergences may largely be due to the extreme brevity of Chronicles,\nand they do not absolutely require a variant form of the tradition\nfor their explanation (so Torrey, _Ezra Studies_, p. 74), particularly\nif _Samaria_ here in Chronicles denotes not the city but simply the\nprovince. Verse 7 is a brief but sufficient abridgment of 2 Kings ix.\n16\u201226 from the point of view of Ahaziah\u2019s concern in the affair. On the\nother hand there is great probability in the view that the Chronicler\u2019s\naccount goes back to a version of the tradition independent of that in\nKings; see the notes on verses 8, 9; and compare Cook in the _Jewish\nQuarterly Review_ for 1908, p. 612.\n\n \u2077Now the destruction\u00b9 of Ahaziah was of God, in that he went\n unto Joram: for when he was come, he went out with Jehoram\n against Jehu the son of Nimshi, whom the LORD had anointed to\n cut off the house of Ahab.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _treading down_.\n\n=7.= _destruction_] Rather, =ruin=, or =downfall=, LXX., \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae).\nAhaziah\u2019s brethren fell with him (verse 8).\n\n_had anointed_] compare 2 Kings ix. 1\u201210.\n\n \u2078And it came to pass, when Jehu was executing judgement upon the\n house of Ahab, that he found the princes of Judah, and the sons\n of the brethren of Ahaziah, ministering to Ahaziah, and slew\n them.\n\n=8.= _the sons of the brethren of Ahaziah_] LXX. \u201cthe brethren (i.e.\nthe kinsmen) of Ahaziah\u201d: so also 2 Kings x. 13. The brethren (in the\nstrict sense of the word) of Ahaziah had already been killed (verse 1).\n\n_ministering_] According to 2 Kings they were going to \u201csalute the\nchildren of the king and the children of the queen\u201d (probably a courtly\nexpression for \u201csalute the king and the queen\u201d). Their murder in\nKings is clearly regarded as subsequent to Ahaziah\u2019s death, whereas in\nChronicles the attack on Ahaziah (verse 9) apparently is placed _after_\nthe murder of the brethren as recorded in the present verse. It is\npossible, however, to suppose that verses 8 and 9 are not meant to be\nrelated to each other in a time sequence, and that verses 7, 8, 9 are\nall relatively independent statements.\n\n \u2079And he sought Ahaziah, and they caught him, (now he was hiding\n in Samaria,) and they brought him to Jehu, and slew him; and\n they buried him, for they said, He is the son of Jehoshaphat,\n who sought the LORD with all his heart. And the house of Ahaziah\n had no power\u00b9 to hold the kingdom.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _And there was none of the house of Ahaziah that had\n power &c._\n\n=9.= _now he was hiding in Samaria_] If Samaria means the city,\nthen according to Chronicles Ahaziah fled southward from Jezreel;\nwhile according to 2 Kings his flight was westward to Megiddo (to be\nidentified with Khan el-Lejjun, B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 228). Perhaps\nhowever Samaria means the _province_ (as in xxv. 13; Ezekiel iv. 10).\nEven so this account of Ahaziah\u2019s wounding and death differs markedly\nfrom that in Kings, where nothing is said of his _hiding_, but simply\nthat he went out with Joram when Jehu encountered Joram (so here verse\n7), was wounded, fled to Megiddo, and died there, but was carried back\nby his servants to Jerusalem and there buried. Here it is stated that\nhe was captured, brought to Jehu, and slain (?before him). The place\nof his burial is unnamed, but it would readily be supposed that he was\nburied by _Jehu\u2019s_ servants and not at Jerusalem. These divergences in\nverses 8, 9 are curious and are most naturally explained as originating\nin a variant form of the tradition.\n\n\n =10\u201212= (= 2 Kings xi. 1\u20123).\n THE REIGN OF ATHALIAH.\n\n \u00b9\u2070Now when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was\n dead, she arose and destroyed all the seed royal of the house of\n Judah.\n\n=10.= _destroyed_] This is the reading of Kings and of the LXX. of\nChronicles The Hebrew reads _spake with_, which is perhaps a euphemism;\ncompare the English \u201cdeal with.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u00b9But Jehoshabeath\u00b9, the daughter of the king, took Joash the\n son of Ahaziah, and stole him away from among the king\u2019s sons\n that were slain, and put him and his nurse in the bedchamber\u00b2.\n So Jehoshabeath, the daughter of king Jehoram, the wife of\n Jehoiada the priest, (for she was the sister of Ahaziah,) hid\n him from Athaliah, so that she slew him not.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xi. 2, _Jehosheba_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _chamber for the beds_.\n\n=11.= _Jehoshabeath_] In Kings \u201cJehosheba.\u201d The two are forms of the\nsame name; compare \u201cElisabeth\u201d (Luke i. 7) and \u201cElisheba\u201d (Exodus vi.\n23), a similar pair.\n\n_in the bedchamber_] margin, =in the chamber for the beds=, i.e.\nperhaps in a store room in which bed furniture was kept: a convenient\nbut an uncertain interpretation.\n\n_the wife of Jehoiada the priest_] Compare xxiii. 1. This relationship\nis not given in Kings.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And he was with them hid in the house of God six years: and\n Athaliah reigned over the land.\n\n=12.= _with them_] i.e. with Jehoiada and Jehoshabeath. In Kings \u201cwith\nher.\u201d\n\n_in the house of God_] \u201cThe chamber for beds\u201d (which was perhaps in the\npalace) was only a temporary hiding-place.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIII.\n\n\n =1\u201211= (compare 2 Kings xi. 4\u201212).\n THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST ATHALIAH.\n\nThe account in Kings of the famous conspiracy which resulted in the\ndownfall and death of Athaliah the queen mother and the coronation of\nthe child Joash has the marks of a graphic and accurate narrative. The\nChronicler evidently desired to reproduce it word for word, but in one\npoint he was obliged to alter it in accordance with his ideas. In Kings\nthe plot is engineered by the high-priest Jehoiada with the help of the\nofficers (\u201ccaptains of hundreds\u201d) and men of the Carites and the guard,\n(i.e. the royal body-guard), who were foreign mercenaries. But the\nstatement in 2 Kings xi. 4, 11, that these men who were both laymen and\nforeigners were permitted by the high-priest to be within the court of\nthe Temple, though no doubt correct in point of fact (see Ezekiel xliv.\n6 f.), was inconceivable to the Chronicler. In his account therefore\nthe soldiers of the guard vanish, and the \u201ccaptains of hundreds\u201d\nare prominent Levites, who organise the conspiracy by gathering the\nLevites and chief men throughout Judah (verse 2); and, further, careful\ndirections are given (verse 6) that none shall enter the Temple save\npriests and Levites \u201cfor they are holy.\u201d The passage is an interesting\nexample of the Chronicler\u2019s procedure in the interests of the\necclesiastical order to which he belonged and in which he believed so\nfirmly.\n\n \u00b9And in the seventh year Jehoiada strengthened himself, and\n took the captains of hundreds, Azariah the son of Jeroham, and\n Ishmael the son of Jehohanan, and Azariah the son of Obed, and\n Maaseiah the son of Adaiah, and Elishaphat the son of Zichri,\n into covenant with him.\n\n=1.= _strengthened himself_] Compare i. 1 (note); the phrase does not\noccur in the parallel passage of Kings.\n\n_Azariah_, etc.] The names of course are not in Kings (see previous\nnote). The individual names add to the naturalness of the Chronicler\u2019s\naccount. It is unlikely that the Levitical contemporaries of the\nChronicler had any reliable traditions enabling them to say who\nprobably were the leading Priests or Levites of Jerusalem in the time\nof Athaliah and Joash. Perhaps the Chronicler has simply chosen names\nwhich were suitable for Levites to bear.\n\n_captains of hundreds_] In 2 Kings \u201ccaptains over hundreds of the\nCarites (i.e. Cherethites) and of the guard.\u201d The Chronicler takes the\ncaptains to be captains of _Levites_.\n\n \u00b2And they went about in Judah, and gathered the Levites out of\n all the cities of Judah, and the heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_ of\n Israel, and they came to Jerusalem.\n\n=2.= _gathered the Levites_] This statement is not found in Kings\u2015\u2015see\nthe head-note.\n\n_Israel_] See xi. 3 (note).\n\n \u00b3And all the congregation made a covenant with the king in the\n house of God. And he said unto them, Behold, the king\u2019s son\n shall reign, as the LORD hath spoken concerning the sons of\n David.\n\n=3.= _all the congregation_] Contrast 2 Kings xi. 4, where the\n\u201ccovenant\u201d is a secret agreement between Jehoiada and the officers of\nthe guard.\n\n_hath spoken concerning_] Compare 2 Samuel vii. 16; 1 Chronicles xvii.\n17.\n\n \u2074This is the thing that ye shall do: a third part of you, that\n come in on the sabbath, of the priests and of the Levites, shall\n be porters of the doors\u00b9;\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _thresholds_.\n\n=4.= _This is the thing that ye shall do_] The arrangements as given\nhere and in 2 Kings are not entirely clear owing to our ignorance\nregarding some of the places referred to. The Chronicler did not\nclearly understand the scheme in Kings, but he was not troubled thereby.\nHe was concerned only to see that in his account the Levites replaced\nthe soldiers of the guard and that no unlawful person entered the\nprecincts of the Temple. According to Kings, it would appear that it\nwas the custom on the Sabbath for two-thirds of the royal guards to\nbe free and for one-third to be on duty at the palace. In order to\navoid arousing suspicion this last third was, according to Jehoiada\u2019s\ndirections, to be at the palace as usual, but it was to be subdivided\ninto thirds and so distributed as to close the various means of\ncommunication between the palace and the rest of the city. Thus\nAthaliah was to be held as in a trap by her own guards (2 Kings xi. 5,\n6). The two-thirds who were free from duty on the Sabbath were to be\nstationed in the Temple about the young king to guard him at his\ncoronation.\n\nThe arrangements are differently and no doubt less correctly stated\nin Chronicles In the first place Levitical Temple guards take the\nplace of the royal guards; secondly, the only division of the guards\nrecognised is a simple division into thirds; finally, the stations of\nthe different divisions are differently given, viz., one-third in the\nTemple, one-third in the palace, and one-third at \u201cthe gate of the\nfoundation.\u201d\n\nUsing the modern terms \u201cbattalion\u201d and \u201ccompany\u201d for the divisions and\nsubdivisions given in Kings, the arrangements may be stated in a form\nwhich allows easy comparison between Kings and Chronicles, as follows:\u2015\u2015\n\n (i) 2 Kings xi. 5\u20127.\n (Royal guards in three battalions.)\n\n 1st battalion on duty at the king\u2019s house (palace).\n A company within the palace (verse 5),\n B company at the gate of Sur,\n C company at another gate (\u201cbehind the guard,\u201d verse 6).\n\n 2nd and 3rd battalions off duty, but brought into the house of the\n Lord (the Temple) by Jehoiada (verse 7).\n\n (ii) 2 Chronicles xxiii. 4, 5.\n (Levites in three bands.)\n\n Band I (= 1st battalion C company of 2 Kings) in the house of God,\n the Chronicler supposing that \u201cthe house\u201d (2 Kings xi. 6) means\n the house of the Lord. More probably it means \u201cthe house of the\n king\u201d (2 Kings xi. verse 5).\n\n Band II (= 1st battalion A company of 2 Kings) at the king\u2019s house\n (so 2 Kings).\n\n Band III (= 1st battalion B company of 2 Kings) at the gate of \u201cthe\n foundation.\u201d\n\n(The Chronicler passes over the 2nd and 3rd battalions, because he has\nalready assigned their duty to 1st battalion C company.).\n\n_of the priests and of the Levites_] Not in Kings. The words are a\nmistaken but intentional gloss of the Chronicler, for it is clear that\nin Kings _lay_ guards are meant.\n\n_porters of the doors_] margin, =of the thresholds=, i.e. of the\nTemple according to the Chronicler, for the word for \u201cdoors\u201d (or\n\u201cthresholds,\u201d _sippim_ in Hebrew) is always used for the thresholds\nof some _sanctuary_, e.g. of the Tabernacle (1 Chronicles ix. 19, 22),\nof the Temple of Solomon (2 Chronicles iii. 7), of (apparently) some\nIsraelite shrine (Amos ix. 1). In the parallel passage (2 Kings xi. 6)\nhowever \u201cthe watch of the house\u201d clearly means \u201cthe watch of the king\u2019s\nhouse\u201d (2 Kings xi. verse 5).\n\n \u2075and a third part shall be at the king\u2019s house; and a third part\n at the gate of the foundation: and all the people shall be in\n the courts of the house of the LORD.\n\n=5.= _a third part shall be at the king\u2019s house; and a third part at\nthe gate of the foundation_] These two-thirds according to the scheme\ngiven above were both stationed about the palace, but they are _not_ to\nbe reckoned as two-thirds of _the whole guard_.\n\n_the gate of the foundation_] \u201cGate of _JSVD_\u201d (Hebrew). This is\ncertainly the \u201cGate of Sur\u201d (_SVR_ in Hebrew) of 2 Kings xi. 6.\nPossibly however we should read \u201cGate of _SVS_ (or _SVSIM_)\u201d i.e.\n\u201cHorse Gate\u201d (verse 15; compare 2 Kings xi. 16) both here and in Kings.\n\n \u2076But let none come into the house of the LORD, save the priests,\n and they that minister of the Levites; they shall come in, for\n they are holy: but all the people shall keep the watch of the\n LORD.\n\n=6.= _let none come into the house of the LORD_] It is clear on the\ncontrary from Kings (verse 11) that the royal guards (who were laymen)\nwere brought into the Temple itself under Jehoiada\u2019s directions. The\nChronicler is evidently at pains to guard against the notion that such\na breach of ritual took place.\n\n_all the people_] Not mentioned in Kings; but compare 1 Kings xi. 14.\n\n \u2077And the Levites shall compass the king round about, every man\n with his weapons in his hand; and whosoever cometh into the\n house, let him be slain: and be ye with the king when he cometh\n in, and when he goeth out.\n\n=7.= _into the house_] 2 Kings \u201cwithin the ranks.\u201d Any one who should\nattempt to break through the ranks of the guard to get near to the king\nwas to be killed. According to the Chronicler Jehoiada\u2019s precaution\nwould protect the sanctity of the Temple as well as the person of the\nyoung king.\n\n \u2078So the Levites and all Judah did according to all that Jehoiada\n the priest commanded: and they took every man his men, those\n that were to come in on the sabbath, with those that were to go\n out on the sabbath; for Jehoiada the priest dismissed not the\n courses.\n\n=8.= _the Levites and all Judah_] In 2 Kings \u201cthe captains over\nhundreds.\u201d See notes on verse 4.\n\n_for Jehoiada the priest dismissed not the courses_] Not in Kings. The\nLevites (1 Chronicles xxiii. 6), the priests (1 Chronicles xxiv. 1),\nand the king\u2019s army (1 Chronicles xxvii. 1 ff.) were each divided into\n\u201ccourses,\u201d but it is clear from the context that courses of Levites are\nmeant here.\n\n \u2079And Jehoiada the priest delivered to the captains of hundreds\n the spears, and bucklers, and shields, that had been king\n David\u2019s, which were in the house of God.\n\n=9.= _shields_] Hebrew _sh\u0115l\u0101\u1e6d\u012bm_; see note on 1 Chronicles xviii. 7.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And he set all the people, every man with his weapon in his\n hand, from the right side\u00b9 of the house to the left side of the\n house, along by the altar and the house, by the king round about.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _shoulder_.\n\n=10.= _with his weapon_] The Hebrew word (_shela\u1e25_) means a \u201cmissile\nweapon.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Then they brought out the king\u2019s son, and put the crown upon\n him\u00b9, and _gave him_ the testimony, and made him king: and\n Jehoiada and his sons anointed him; and they said, God save the\n king\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _put upon him the crown and the testimony_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Let the king live_.\n\n=11.= _put the crown upon him, and_ gave him _the testimony_] So\nLXX. and Hebrew both here and in 2 Kings xi. 12. Note that the words\n\u201cgave him\u201d are not in the Hebrew What then is the meaning of \u201cput the\ncrown ... the testimony\u201d? It is supposed that by \u201cthe testimony\u201d some\ndocument inscribed with laws, a charter binding king and people to live\naccording to its precepts, is meant, and that this document was placed\nin the hands or on the head of Joash along with the crown. The wearing\nof an inscription or of a document on a solemn occasion, though strange\nto Western thought, is not alien from Eastern methods; compare Exodus\nxxviii. 36 ff.; Deuteronomy vi. 6\u20128; Job xxxi. 35, 36; but evidence of\nsuch a ceremony at the coronation of a monarch is lacking. Hence it is\ntempting to think that we should read as the true text of Kings \u201cput\nupon him the crown =and the bracelets=\u201d\u2015\u2015a brilliant conjecture made by\nWellhausen, which involves in Hebrew only the addition of one consonant\nto the present text, but again there is no satisfactory evidence that\nbracelets were put on the king at his coronation: Wellhausen relied on\n2 Samuel i. 10. Further, it is very probable that the error (if it is\none) was present in the text of Kings which lay before the Chronicler,\nand therefore in Chronicles \u201cthe testimony\u201d may be the original reading.\n\n_Jehoiada and his sons_] In Kings, \u201cthey anointed him\u201d (without\nspecifying the actors).\n\n_God save the king_] Literally, _Let the king live!_\n\n\n =12\u201215= (= 2 Kings xi. 13\u201216).\n DEATH OF ATHALIAH.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And when Athaliah heard the noise of the people running and\n praising the king\u00b9, she came to the people into the house of the\n LORD:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _of the people, of the guard, and of those who praised\n the king_.\n\n=12.= _running_] The word might mean \u201cthe guard\u201d (_literally_\nrunners)\u2015\u2015see the margin It has that meaning in Kings, but the\nChronicler interprets it literally as the participle of the verb.\n\n_praising the king_] Perhaps verses were extemporised in praise of a\nking at his coronation, just as over a maiden at her marriage; compare\nPsalms lxxviii. 63.\n\n_she came_] Athaliah was allowed to pass the palace guard, but now it\nwas too late for her to save her crown.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3and she looked, and, behold, the king stood by his pillar at\n the entrance, and the captains and the trumpets by the king;\n and all the people of the land rejoiced, and blew with trumpets;\n the singers also _played_ on instruments of music, and led the\n singing of praise. Then Athaliah rent her clothes, and said,\n Treason, treason.\n\n=13.= _by his pillar_] compare 2 Kings xxiii. 3 (= 2 Chronicles xxxiv.\n31, \u201cin his place\u201d). Although \u201cpillar\u201d is attested by 2 Kings xxiii. 3,\nthe phrase is curious. Perhaps we should here read \u201cin his place,\u201d as\nin xxxiv. 31: the difference in Hebrew is very slight.\n\n_at the entrance_] In 2 Kings _as the manner was_.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And Jehoiada the priest brought out the captains of hundreds\n that were set over the host, and said unto them, Have her forth\n between the ranks; and whoso followeth her, let him be slain\n with the sword: for the priest said, Slay her not in the house\n of the LORD.\n\n=14.= _brought out_] Read (as 2 Kings) =commanded=.\n\n_between the ranks_] i.e. she was to be taken out between two lines of\nguards.\n\n \u00b9\u2075So they made way for her; and she went to the entry of the\n horse gate to the king\u2019s house: and they slew her there.\n\n=15.= _the horse gate_] Compare the note on the \u201cgate of the\nfoundation\u201d (verse 5).\n\n\n =16\u201221= (= 2 Kings xi. 17\u201220).\n THE SECRET OF THE FALL OF ATHALIAH.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And Jehoiada made a covenant between himself, and all the\n people, and the king, that they should be the LORD\u2019s people.\n\n=16.= _between himself, and all the people, and the king_] Jehoiada\nputs himself first as regent. In 2 Kings \u201cbetween the LORD and the king\nand the people.\u201d\n\n_that they should be the LORD\u2019s people_] Compare xxix. 10, xxxiv. 31;\nExodus xxiv. 1\u201211; Deuteronomy xxvi. 17, 18; Nehemiah ix. 36\u201238.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And all the people went to the house of Baal, and brake it\n down, and brake his altars and his images in pieces, and slew\n Mattan the priest of Baal before the altars.\n\n=17.= _the house of Baal_] When this was erected is not known, perhaps\nunder Jehoram (xxi. 6) or Ahaziah (xxii. 3), but it was doubtless\nintended for the worship of the Tyrian Baal, for Athaliah was probably\ngrand-daughter of a Tyrian king (compare 2 Kings viii. 18 with 1 Kings\nxvi. 31). It is interesting to see that the revolt against Athaliah\nin Jerusalem, like the revolution led by Jehu against her parents,\nAhab and Jezebel, in the Northern Kingdom, was fostered, if not indeed\ncaused, by religious antipathy. At least these passages are of high\nvalue in showing the hold which the worship of Jehovah had already\nobtained upon the loyalty of Israel. Court influences, always powerful\nin such small states, when cast against the worship of Jehovah, were\nunable for long to maintain the struggle against the national\n\u201cjealousy\u201d for Him.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Jehoiada appointed the offices of the house of the LORD\n under the hand of the priests the Levites, whom David had\n distributed in the house of the LORD, to offer the burnt\n offerings of the LORD, as it is written in the law of Moses,\n with rejoicing and with singing, according to the order of\n David\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _by the hands of David_.\n\n=18.= _And Jehoiada appointed_, etc.] This whole verse is represented\nin Kings simply by the words, \u201cAnd the priest appointed officers\n(\u2018offices,\u2019 margin) over the house of the LORD\u201d (i.e. officers for\nthe care of the Temple, e.g. to see to cleaning and repairing it).\n\n_the priests the Levites_] Read probably =the priests and the Levites=,\nand see the note on the same phrase in xxx. 27.\n\n_according to the order of David_] Note that the Chronicler ascribes\nall sacrificial arrangements to the law of Moses, but all musical\narrangements to David, compare 1 Chronicles xxv.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And he set the porters at the gates of the house of the LORD,\n that none which was unclean in any thing should enter in.\n\n=19.= _he set the porters_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxvi. 1 ff., 13 ff.\nJehoiada is regarded as re-establishing a Davidic arrangement which had\nfallen into disuse.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And he took the captains of hundreds, and the nobles, and the\n governors of the people, and all the people of the land, and\n brought down the king from the house of the LORD: and they came\n through the upper gate unto the king\u2019s house, and set the king\n upon the throne of the kingdom. \u00b2\u00b9So all the people of the land\n rejoiced, and the city was quiet: and they slew Athaliah with\n the sword.\n\n=20.= _the nobles_] Hebrew _add\u012br\u012bm_; compare Nehemiah iii. 5 (with\nRyle\u2019s note). In 2 Kings, \u201cthe Carites\u201d; compare verse 1 (note).\n\n_the upper gate_] compare xxvii. 3, \u201cthe upper gate of the house of the\nLORD.\u201d In 2 Kings, \u201cby the way of the gate of the guard\u201d (doubtless one\nof the gates of the _palace_). The Chronicler, writing at a time when\nthe palace had ceased to exist, naturally fixes localities by reference\nto the Temple. The gate in question was probably one in the north wall\nof the Temple court, referred to in Jeremiah xx. 2 as \u201cthe upper gate\nof Benjamin.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIV.\n\n\n =1\u20123= (compare 2 Kings xi. 21\u2012xii. 3).\n JOASH BEGINS TO REIGN.\n\n \u00b9Joash was seven years old when he began to reign; and he\n reigned forty years in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name was\n Zibiah of Beer-sheba. \u00b2And Joash did that which was right in the\n eyes of the LORD all the days of Jehoiada the priest.\n\n=2.= After this verse Kings adds \u201cHowbeit the high places were not\ntaken away: the people sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places.\u201d\nThis the Chronicler omits, for it was quite irreconcilable with his\nnotion of the religious reformation which marks the opening years of\nthe reign of Joash.\n\n \u00b3And Jehoiada took for him two wives; and he begat sons and\n daughters.\n\n=3.= _And Jehoiada_, etc.] This verse is not in Kings. It was the duty\nof a Jewish father to provide his son with a wife; Jehoiada standing\n_in loco parentis_ does this for Joash.\n\n\n =4\u201214= (= 2 Kings xii. 4\u201216).\n THE RESTORATION OF THE TEMPLE.\n\n \u2074And it came to pass after this, that Joash was minded to\n restore the house of the LORD. \u2075And he gathered together the\n priests and the Levites, and said to them, Go out unto the\n cities of Judah, and gather of all Israel money to repair the\n house of your God from year to year, and see that ye hasten the\n matter. Howbeit the Levites hastened it not.\n\n=5.= _and the Levites_] Not in Kings; compare xxiii. 2 (note).\n\n_Go out unto the cities of Judah_] According to Kings, the restoration\nfund was to consist of a poll-tax (paid at the Temple at the Great\nFeasts, Exodus xxiii. 14\u201217) and of free-will offerings paid in money,\nand nothing is said there about collecting money _outside_ Jerusalem.\n\n_hastened it not_] In Kings, \u201cin the three and twentieth year of\nking Jehoash the priests had not repaired the breaches of the house.\u201d\nSuch protracted neglect of the repairs of the Temple appears the more\nreprehensible (in Kings) since the money was paid at the Temple, and\ntherefore was actually in the hands of the priests. At the same time,\nto the Chronicler, the royal command to use money from the poll-tax\nand free-will offerings for the purpose of repairs was an infringement\nof the priests\u2019 prerogatives. He therefore relieves the situation,\npartly by representing that the money was to be obtained by a special\ncollection throughout the land, and also by softening the twenty-three\nyears of inaction into \u201chastened it not.\u201d\n\n \u2076And the king called for Jehoiada the chief, and said unto him,\n Why hast thou not required of the Levites to bring in out of\n Judah and out of Jerusalem the tax of Moses the servant of the\n LORD, and of the congregation of\u00b9 Israel, for the tent of the\n testimony?\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for Israel_.\n\n=6.= _of the Levites_] See note on verse 5.\n\n_the tax of Moses_] i.e. the half-shekel due from each male for support\nof the sanctuary, according to Exodus xxx. 14\u201216, xxxviii. 25, 26.\n\n_the tent of the testimony_] \u201cThe testimony\u201d refers to the Ten\nCommandments, which contained the substance of God\u2019s testimony\n(protestation) to Israel. To illustrate the use of the phrase, note\nthat the two tables of stone were called \u201ctables of the testimony\u201d\n(Exodus xxxi. 18, Revised Version); the ark which contained them was\ncalled the \u201cark of the testimony\u201d (Exodus xxv. 22); the veil which hung\nbefore the ark was the \u201cveil of the testimony\u201d (Leviticus xxiv. 3);\nthe tent which contained the ark was either the \u201ctabernacle (Hebrew\n_mishk\u0101n_) of the testimony\u201d (Exodus xxxviii. 21, Revised Version)\nor the \u201ctent (Hebrew _\u014dhel_) of the testimony\u201d (Numbers ix. 15). The\ntabernacle, with all its contents, was to be a standing protest to\nIsrael that Jehovah was with His people according to covenant, and\nthat every breach of the covenant would call forth punishment. Compare\nDeuteronomy iv. 25, 26, viii. 19, etc.\n\n \u2077For the sons of Athaliah, that wicked woman, had broken up the\n house of God; and also all the dedicated things of the house of\n the LORD did they bestow upon the Baalim. \u2078So the king commanded,\n and they made a chest, and set it without at the gate of the\n house of the LORD.\n\n=7.= _the sons of Athaliah_] To be understood figuratively, \u201cthe\nadherents of Athaliah.\u201d So \u201ca son of the apothecaries\u201d (Nehemiah iii.\n8; compare Authorized Version with Revised Version) is \u201ca member of the\napothecaries\u2019 guild\u201d and \u201cthe sons of the prophets\u201d (2 Kings ii. 15,\netc.) are \u201cthe adherents (or \u2018scholars\u2019) of the prophets.\u201d\n\n_had broken up_] Rather, =had broken into=.\n\n_all the dedicated things_] Compare xv. 18; 1 Chronicles xviii. 10, 11.\nProbably gold, silver and brass.\n\n_did they bestow upon the Baalim_] Or, _did they make into images of\nBaal_. Compare Hosea ii. 8, Revised Version margin.\n\n\u2079And they made a proclamation through Judah and Jerusalem, to bring in\nfor the LORD the tax that Moses the servant of God laid upon Israel in\nthe wilderness. \u00b9\u2070And all the princes and all the people rejoiced, and\nbrought in, and cast into the chest, until they had made an end.\n\n=9.= Kings has nothing corresponding to this verse; compare verse 5\n(note).\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And it was so, that at what time the chest was brought unto\n the king\u2019s office\u00b9 by the hand\u00b2 of the Levites, and when they\n saw that there was much money, the king\u2019s scribe\u00b3 and the chief\n priest\u2019s officer came and emptied the chest, and took it, and\n carried it to its place again. Thus they did day by day, and\n gathered money in abundance. \u00b9\u00b2And the king and Jehoiada gave it\n to such as did the work of the service of the house of the LORD;\n and they hired masons and carpenters to restore the house of the\n LORD, and also such as wrought iron and brass to repair the\n house of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _officers_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, which was _under the hand_.\n\n \u00b3 Or, _secretary_.\n\n=11.= _at what time ... by the hand of the Levites_] This clause is not\nin Kings.\n\n_the chief priest\u2019s officer_] According to Kings the high-priest was\npresent _himself_. It would seem as if the Chronicler was concerned for\nthe dignity of the high-priest, and desired to equate it with that of\nthe king; if the latter was to be represented only by an officer, the\nformer must be also.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3So the workmen wrought, and the work was perfected\u00b9 by them,\n and they set up the house of God in its state\u00b2, and strengthened\n it.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _healing went up upon the work_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _according to the proportion thereof_.\n\n=13.= _in its state_] i.e. according to its former state.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And when they had made an end, they brought the rest of the\n money before the king and Jehoiada, whereof were made vessels\n for the house of the LORD, even vessels to minister, and to\n offer withal\u00b9, and spoons, and vessels of gold and silver.\n And they offered burnt offerings in the house of the LORD\n continually all the days of Jehoiada.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _pestles_.\n\n=14.= _the rest of the money ... whereof were made vessels for the\nhouse of the LORD_] This verse conflicts with 2 Kings xii. 13, 14,\nwhich states that the money gathered was not spent on gold and silver\nvessels for the Temple but was given to the workmen who repaired the\nhouse. The lack of such utensils and the paucity of money implied in\nKings was evidently not credited by the Chronicler.\n\n_continually_] Perhaps primarily in allusion to the morning and\nevening daily sacrifice (Numbers xxviii. 3\u20126), but having also a wider\nreference to the whole round of sacrifices.\n\n\n =15\u201219= (no parallel in 2 Kings).\n THE APOSTASY OF JOASH.\n\n \u00b9\u2075But Jehoiada waxed old and was full of days, and he died; an\n hundred and thirty years old was he when he died.\n\n=15.= _an hundred and thirty years_] The age ascribed to Jacob in\nGenesis xlvii. 9. Its incongruity here is well pointed out by Curtis\nwho notes that, were the figure correct, Jehoiada\u2019s wife must have\nbeen about 25 years old and he about 100 at the time of Athaliah\u2019s\nassassination. The ascription of so great length of life and the\nhonours of his burial (verse 16) are suitable to the respect which\nthe Chronicler felt Jehoiada to have merited.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And they buried him in the city of David among the kings,\n because he had done good in Israel, and toward God and his house.\n\n=16.= _among the kings_] Compare verse 25 and xxi. 20.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Now after the death of Jehoiada came the princes of Judah, and\n made obeisance to the king. Then the king hearkened unto them.\n\n=17.= _made obeisance_] Obeisance foreshadowed a request; compare\n1 Kings i. 16.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And they forsook the house of the LORD, the God of their\n fathers, and served the Asherim and the idols: and wrath came\n upon Judah and Jerusalem for this their guiltiness.\n\n=18.= _they forsook the house of the LORD_] Compare xxix. 6, \u201c[they]\nhave turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD.\u201d These\nphrases are a euphemism meaning \u201cto commit apostasy.\u201d\n\n_the Asherim and the idols_] Compare xiv. 3 (note).\n\n_wrath_] Hebrew _qec\u0323eph_; compare xix. 2 (note). The calamities in\nquestion are narrated in verses 23 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2079Yet he sent prophets to them, to bring them again unto the\n LORD; and they testified against them: but they would not give\n ear.\n\n=19.= _he sent prophets_] Compare xxxvi. 15.\n\n_to them_] Rather, =among them=.\n\n\n =20\u201222= (no parallel in 2 Kings).\n THE MARTYRDOM OF ZECHARIAH SON OF JEHOIADA.\n\nThis martyrdom is referred to by our Lord in Luke xi. 51, \u201cfrom the\nblood of Abel unto the blood of Zachariah who perished between the\naltar and the house,\u201d i.e. \u201cthe temple\u201d (compare Matthew xxiii. 35).\nAs Chronicles is the last book in the Jewish Canon, \u201cFrom Abel to\nZachariah\u201d practically includes the whole Old Testament. In the text\nof Matthew Zachariah is called \u201cson of Barachiah\u201d either by a confusion\nwith Zechariah the prophet contemporary with Haggai, or, possibly,\nowing to confusion with a certain Zechariah, son of Berachiah,\nmentioned in Josephus (_War of the Jews_ IV. v. 4) as having been\nmurdered in the Temple by the Zealots, _circa_ 67, 68 A.D. (see e.g.\nWeiss, _Schriften des N.T._, pp. 376, 377).\n\n \u00b2\u2070And the spirit of God came upon\u00b9 Zechariah the son of Jehoiada\n the priest; and he stood above the people, and said unto them,\n Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD,\n that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he\n hath also forsaken you.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _clothed itself with_.\n\n=20.= _came upon_] Hebrew \u201cclothed itself with\u201d; compare Judges vi. 34;\n1 Chronicles xii. 18.\n\n_stood above the people_] Compare Jeremiah xxxvi. 10 (Baruch reads\nJeremiah\u2019s words from the window of an upper chamber to the people\nassembled in the court below); Nehemiah viii. 4 (Ezra reads the Law\nfrom a pulpit of wood).\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones\n at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the\n LORD.\n\n=21.= _in the court_) An aggravation of the murder; compare xxiii. 14.\nThe altar of burnt-offering stood in the court (compare viii. 12) and\nthe execution (Luke xi. 51) took place between this altar and the\nTemple itself.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada\n his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died,\n he said, The LORD look upon it, and require it.\n\n=22.= _The LORD look upon it, and require it_] Compare 2 Maccabees\nxiv. 45, 46, and contrast Acts vii. 60.\n\n\n =23, 24= (compare 2 Kings xii. 17, 18).\n THE SYRIAN INVASION.\n\nIn 2 Kings the invasion is not represented as a judgement on Joash, for\nno sin is mentioned for which this could be the punishment.\n\nAs regards the campaign itself 2 Kings says that the Syrians were\nbought off with a heavy bribe from attacking Jerusalem; nothing is said\nof the amount of damage done during the invasion. The Chronicler on the\ncontrary says nothing of the cause of the withdrawal of the Syrians,\nbut simply says that a small force of them inflicted great loss and\ntook much spoil.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And it came to pass at the end\u00b9 of the year, that the army\n of the Syrians came up against him: and they came to Judah and\n Jerusalem, and destroyed all the princes of the people from\n among the people, and sent all the spoil of them unto the king\n of Damascus.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _revolution_.\n\n=23.= _at the end of the year_] Rather, =in the course of a year=, i.e.\nwhen the same time of the year had come round again.\n\n_the princes_] Who had been leaders in the apostasy (verse 17).\n\n_from among the people_] The reading of the Hebrew is doubtful; the\nwords should perhaps be expunged.\n\n \u00b2\u2074For the army of the Syrians came with a small company of\n men; and the LORD delivered a very great host into their hand,\n because they had forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers. So\n they executed judgement\u00b9 upon Joash.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _judgements_.\n\n=24.= _because they had forsaken the LORD_] Mark the Chronicler\u2019s\ninsistent enforcement of a religious meaning in history.\n\n\n =25\u201227= (compare 2 Kings xii. 19\u201221).\n THE END OF JOASH.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And when they were departed from him, (for they left him in\n great diseases,) his own servants conspired against him for the\n blood of the sons\u00b9 of Jehoiada the priest, and slew him on his\n bed, and he died: and they buried him in the city of David, but\n they buried him not in the sepulchres of the kings.\n\n \u00b9 The Septuagint and Vulgate read, _son_.\n\n=25.= _for the blood of the sons of Jehoiada_] No reason is alleged for\nthe conspiracy in Kings.\n\n_sons_] LXX. and Vulgate \u201cson\u201d; compare verse 20.\n\n_on his bed_] In Kings it is simply \u201csmote Joash at the house of Millo,\non the way that goeth down to Silla.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u2076And these are they that conspired against him; Zabad\u00b9 the son\n of Shimeath the Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith\u00b2\n the Moabitess.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xii. 12, _Jozacar_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Kings xii. 21, _Shomer_.\n\n=26.= _Zabad_] In 2 Kings \u201cJozacar.\u201d The difference between the names\nis not great in Hebrew.\n\n_Shimeath the Ammonitess ... Shimrith the Moabitess_] In 2 Kings\nsimply _Shimeath_ and _Shomer_ (no mention of their nationality being\nadded). In Kings the names are masculines, Shimeath and Shomer being\nthe fathers of the murderers. The Chronicler makes them out to be the\nmothers by altering _Shomer_ to Shimrith (_Shimeath_ already has a\nfeminine termination); and by calling them respectively women of Ammon\nand Moab he casts increased obloquy upon the apostate Joash, the victim\n(so we are to surmise) of half-breed men whom presumably his foreign\nidolatries had encouraged to dwell in Jerusalem. At the same time the\nevil of foreign marriages is emphasised by the story.\n\n \u00b2\u2077Now concerning his sons, and the greatness of the burdens\n _laid_ upon\u00b9 him, and the rebuilding\u00b2 of the house of God,\n behold, they are written in the commentary of the book of the\n kings. And Amaziah his son reigned in his stead.\n\n \u00b9 Or, uttered _against_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _founding_.\n\n=27.= _the burdens_ laid _upon him_] Render (with margin), =the burdens=\n(i.e. the prophetic rebukes) =uttered against him=. Compare verse 19.\nThe Hebrew text of the first half of the verse is uncertain.\n\n_the commentary_] Hebrew _midrash_. Compare Introduction, \u00a7\u00a05.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXV.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 2 Kings xiv. 1\u20126).\n AMAZIAH SUCCEEDS.\n\n \u00b9Amaziah was twenty and five years old when he began to reign;\n and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem: and his\n mother\u2019s name was Jehoaddan of Jerusalem. \u00b2And he did that which\n was right in the eyes of the LORD, but not with a perfect heart.\n\n=2.= _not with a perfect heart_] In Kings, \u201cyet not like David his\nfather\u201d (because \u201cthe high places were not taken away\u201d). The Chronicler\nhas something more serious in his mind; compare verses 14\u201216.\n\n \u00b3Now it came to pass, when the kingdom was established unto him,\n that he slew his servants which had killed the king his father.\n\n=3.= _unto him_] LXX., \u1f10\u03bd \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u201cin his hand,\u201d as in Kings.\n\n \u2074But he put not their children to death, but did according\n to that which is written in the law in the book of Moses, as\n the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the\n children, neither shall the children die for the fathers: but\n every man shall die for his own sin.\n\n=4.= _he put not their children to death_] Contrast Joshua vii. 24 ff.;\n2 Kings ix. 26. Clearly the sparing of the children is here mentioned\nas being a practice unknown or still very unusual at the time.\n\n_according to that which is written_] i.e. in Deuteronomy xxiv. 16\n(compare Ezekiel xviii. 20).\n\n\n =5\u201210= (not in Kings).\n AMAZIAH PREPARES FOR WAR.\n\n \u2075Moreover Amaziah gathered Judah together, and ordered them\n according to their fathers\u2019 houses, under captains of thousands\n and captains of hundreds, even all Judah and Benjamin: and he\n numbered them from twenty years old and upward, and found them\n three hundred thousand chosen men, able to go forth to war, that\n could handle spear and shield.\n\n=5.= _three hundred thousand_] Compare the much larger numbers recorded\nfor Asa (xiv. 8) and Jehoshaphat (xvii. 14 ff.).\n\n \u2076He hired also an hundred thousand mighty men of valour out of\n Israel for an hundred talents of silver.\n\n=6.= _He hired also ... out of Israel_] The sequel to the hiring of\nthese mercenaries is given in verses 10 and 13. The episode, which is\nentirely unknown apart from the present passage, is most interesting.\nIt agrees most admirably with the Chronicler\u2019s way of thinking; for the\nsin of seeking Israelite help is punished through the damage inflicted\nby the disappointed soldiers after their dismissal, whilst the virtue\nof dismissing them in obedience to the prophet\u2019s command is rewarded\nby the victory gained by Amaziah over Edom. The story seems too subtle\nto be _wholly_ an invention, and several scholars consider it probable\nthat the hiring of the Israelites and their subsequent plundering has\na basis in some old tradition.\n\n \u2077But there came a man of God to him, saying, O king, let not the\n army of Israel go with thee; for the LORD is not with Israel,\n _to wit_, with all the children of Ephraim.\n\n=7.= _the LORD is not with Israel_] Compare xiii. 8\u201212.\n\n_all the children of Ephraim_] the phrase is added to show that _here_\nthe writer has used \u201cIsrael\u201d in the sense of the Northern Kingdom.\n\n \u2078But if thou wilt go\u00b9, do _valiantly_, be strong for the battle:\n God shall cast thee down before the enemy; for God hath power to\n help, and to cast down.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _go thou_.\n\n=8.= _God shall cast thee down_] i.e. If despite the warning he\npersists in his purpose, God will cause his effort to fail, no matter\nhow well he fights.\n\n \u2079And Amaziah said to the man of God, But what shall we do for\n the hundred talents which I have given to the army of Israel\u00b9?\n And the man of God answered, The LORD is able to give thee much\n more than this. \u00b9\u2070Then Amaziah separated them, _to wit_, the\n army\u00b9 that was come to him out of Ephraim, to go home again:\n wherefore their anger was greatly kindled against Judah, and\n they returned home in fierce anger.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _troop_.\n\n=9.= _The LORD is able to give thee much more than this_] An utterance\nworthy to be placed in the mouth of a prophet.\n\n\n =11, 12= (compare 2 Kings xiv. 7).\n VICTORY OVER EDOM.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And Amaziah took courage, and led forth his people, and went\n to the Valley of Salt, and smote of the children of Seir ten\n thousand.\n\n=11.= _the Valley of Salt_] The scene of one of David\u2019s victories\n(1 Chronicles xviii. 12; see note there).\n\n_children of Seir_] The Edomites were so called because \u201cMount Seir\u201d\nwas part of their territory; Deuteronomy ii. 5, and see note on xx. 10.\nOriginally subdued in David\u2019s reign, they had revolted in the time of\nJehoram (see xxi. 10).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And _other_ ten thousand did the children of Judah carry away\n alive, and brought them unto the top of the rock\u00b9, and cast them\n down from the top of the rock\u00b9, that they all were broken in\n pieces.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _Sela_.\n\n=12.= other _ten thousand ... carry away alive_) Neither this capture\nnor the subsequent massacre is mentioned in Kings The huge scale of\nthe victory may be only a product of the Chronicler\u2019s free imagination.\nOn the other hand, if any real information were available outside\nthe canonical books this is the sort of tradition we might expect to\nsurvive, full allowance of course being made for great exaggeration\nin the numbers given. Further, it accords with the sequence of events\ngiven in Chronicles, see note on xxvi. 7.\n\n\n =13= (no parallel in Kings).\n OUTRAGES OF THE EPHRAIMITE MERCENARIES.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3But the men of the army\u00b9 which Amaziah sent back, that they\n should not go with him to battle, fell upon the cities of Judah,\n from Samaria even unto Beth-horon, and smote of them three\n thousand, and took much spoil.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _the sons of the troop_.\n\n=13.= _the cities of Judah, from Samaria even unto Beth-horon_] We\nmight have expected the two names given to be names of cities belonging\nto the Southern Kingdom. But Samaria is given apparently as the base\nfrom which the marauders started.\n\n\n =14\u201216= (not in Kings).\n AMAZIAH\u2019S IDOLATRY AND THE PROPHET\u2019S REBUKE.\n\n=14\u201216.= The great disaster which befell Amaziah at the hands of\nJoash king of Israel and which is about to be narrated in verses\n17\u201224 seemed to require some heinous transgression for its cause.\nThis the Chronicler supplies in the assertion that, after the defeat\nof Edom, Amaziah actually brought back Edomite images and set them up\nin Jerusalem for worship (verses 14\u201216): a truly horrible result of\na victory which had resulted from obedience to Jehovah\u2019s word by His\nprophet!\n\n \u00b9\u2074Now it came to pass, after that Amaziah was come from the\n slaughter of the Edomites, that he brought the gods of the\n children of Seir, and set them up to be his gods, and bowed down\n himself before them, and burned incense unto them.\n\n=14.= _bowed down ... and burned incense_] The tenses in the Hebrew\nare imperfects and imply that this became Amaziah\u2019s practice. The act\nwas according to a policy frequently pursued in ancient times. Solomon\naffords an instance of it (1 Kings xi. 7).\n\n \u00b9\u2075Wherefore the anger of the LORD was kindled against Amaziah,\n and he sent unto him a prophet, which said unto him, Why hast\n thou sought after the gods of the people, which have not\n delivered their own people out of thine hand?\n\n=15.= _which have not delivered_] Such deliverance being in popular\nthought the proof of a deity\u2019s power; compare Isaiah xxxvi. 18 ff.,\nxxxvii. 18 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And it came to pass, as he talked with him, that _the king_\n said unto him, Have we made thee of the king\u2019s counsel? forbear;\n why shouldest thou be smitten? Then the prophet forbare, and\n said, I know that God hath determined to destroy thee, because\n thou hast done this, and hast not hearkened unto my counsel.\n\n=16.= _of the king\u2019s counsel_] Literally, \u201ccounsellor to the king.\u201d\n\n_hath determined_] Literally, \u201chath counselled\u201d (with a play on the\nking\u2019s word).\n\n\n =17\u201224= (= 2 Kings xiv. 8\u201214).\n AMAZIAH CONQUERED BY JOASH.\n\nThe overwhelming defeat of Amaziah by Joash of Israel, involving the\ndestruction of part of the defences of Jerusalem and the plundering\nof the Temple, must have been an affair of the highest importance in\nJudean history. The relative weakness of Judah compared with Israel is\nstill less apparent in Chronicles than in Kings. For a discussion of\nthe evidence see Cook in _Encyclopedia Britannica_, s.v. _Jews_, p. 379.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Then Amaziah king of Judah took advice, and sent to Joash,\n the son of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu, king of Israel, saying,\n Come, let us look one another in the face.\n\n=17.= _took advice_] =Took counsel=, presumably (according to the\nChronicler\u2019s narrative) with a view to demanding satisfaction from\nJoash for the ravages of the Israelite mercenaries (verse 13). The\nsequel suggests that Joash refused to give satisfaction.\n\n_let us look one another in the face_] The proposal may be either to\nfight or (better) to discuss Amaziah\u2019s claims, the two kings meeting\nas equals. The latter is probably the right alternative, for the answer\nof Joash draws a scoffing parallel between Amaziah\u2019s proposition and\na thorn\u2019s proposal of alliance with a cedar. Had Amaziah\u2019s words been\na _challenge to fight_, Joash\u2019s answer might rather have taken the form\nof the parable in Judges ix. 15, \u201cThe thorn said, Fire shall come out\nof the thorn and devour the cedars of Lebanon,\u201d etc.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Joash king of Israel sent to Amaziah, king of Judah,\n saying, The thistle\u00b9 that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that\n was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife: and\n there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down\n the thistle.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _thorn_.\n\n=18.= _the thistle_] margin, =thorn=; compare Proverbs xxvi. 9 (same\nHebrew word).\n\n \u00b9\u2079Thou sayest, Lo, thou hast smitten Edom; and thine heart\n lifteth thee up to boast: abide now at home; why shouldest thou\n meddle to _thy_ hurt\u00b9, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and\n Judah with thee?\n\n \u00b9 Or, _provoke calamity_.\n\n=19.= _Thou sayest_] i.e. to thyself.\n\n_meddle to thy hurt_] margin, =provoke calamity=, i.e. by making claims\nwhich he could not enforce.\n\n \u00b2\u2070But Amaziah would not hear; for it was of God, that he might\n deliver them into the hand _of their enemies_, because they had\n sought after the gods of Edom.\n\n=20.= _for it was of God_] Not in Kings. This turn is characteristic of\nthe Chronicler; compare x. 15, xxii. 7.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9So Joash king of Israel went up; and he and Amaziah king of\n Judah looked one another in the face at Beth-shemesh, which\n belongeth to Judah.\n\n=21.= _he and Amaziah ... looked one another in the face_] The\nhistorian by a kind of irony takes up Amaziah\u2019s phrase (verse 17) and\ngives it a fresh application. Compare the double application (by a\nsimilar irony) of the phrase, \u201clift up the head\u201d in Genesis xl. 13, 19.\n\n_at Beth-shemesh_] Compare 1 Chronicles vi. 59 [44, Hebrew] (note).\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Judah was put to the worse before Israel; and they fled\n every man to his tent.\n\n=22.= _to his tent_] Compare vii. 10 (note).\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And Joash king of Israel took Amaziah king of Judah, the son\n of Joash the son of Jehoahaz, at Beth-shemesh, and brought him\n to Jerusalem, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem from the gate\n of Ephraim unto the corner gate\u00b9, four hundred cubits.\n\n \u00b9 So in 2 Kings xiv. 13. The text has, _the gate that looketh_.\n\n=23.= _the son of Jehoahaz_] i.e. the son of _Ahaziah_, Jehoahaz and\nAhaziah being varying forms of the same name; compare xxi. 17 (note).\n\n_brake down the wall_] Rather, =made a breach= (or =breaches=) =in\nthe wall=. The same verb is used in Nehemiah i. 3 (\u201cbroken down\u201d) and\nNehemiah iv. 7 (\u201cthe breaches\u201d).\n\n_the gate of Ephraim_] Its precise position is not known, but it was no\ndoubt in the north or north-west wall of the city, on the road to\nEphraim. Compare Nehemiah viii. 16.\n\n_the corner gate_] Hebrew text doubtful, but LXX. \u1f15\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\nCompare xxvi. 9; Jeremiah xxxi. 38; Zechariah xiv. 10. Most probably\nthis gate also was near the north-west angle of the walls, but nothing\ncertain is known of its position.\n\n_four hundred cubits_] About 600 feet according to the ancient cubit,\nand 700 according to the later standard; compare iii. 3 (note).\n\n \u00b2\u2074And _he took_ all the gold and silver, and all the vessels\n that were found in the house of God with Obed-edom, and the\n treasures of the king\u2019s house, the hostages also, and returned\n to Samaria.\n\n=24.= _And_ he took] The verb is missing in Chronicles, and is supplied\nfrom Kings.\n\n_with Obed-edom_] i.e. with _the family of_ Obed-edom which (1\nChronicles xxvi. 4\u20128, 15) served as doorkeepers in the House of God.\nThe words are an addition of the Chronicler.\n\n\n =25\u201228= (= 2 Kings xiv. 17\u201220).\n THE END OF AMAZIAH.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah lived after the\n death of Joash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel fifteen years.\n \u00b2\u2076Now the rest of the acts of Amaziah, first and last, behold,\n are they not written in the book of the kings of Judah and\n Israel? \u00b2\u2077Now from the time that Amaziah did turn away from\n following the LORD they made a conspiracy against him in\n Jerusalem; and he fled to Lachish: but they sent after him to\n Lachish, and slew him there.\n\n=27.= _from the time_] The Chronicler characteristically connects\nthe conspiracy with Amaziah\u2019s apostasy; in Kings the only fact of the\nconspiracy is stated.\n\n_a conspiracy_] Athaliah, Joash, Amaziah each fell one after the other\nbefore a conspiracy. Jehoiada\u2019s example had far-reaching results.\n\n_to Lachish_] Perhaps he was trying to reach Egypt.\n\n \u00b2\u2078And they brought him upon horses, and buried him with his\n fathers in the city of Judah\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xiv. 20, _the city of David_.\n\n=28.= _upon horses_] Render, =upon the horses=; i.e. upon the horses of\nsome of his pursuers.\n\n_the city of Judah_] Read, with the margin, the Versions and 2 Kings,\n=the city of David=.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVI.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 2 Kings xiv. 21, 22, xv. 2, 3).\n UZZIAH\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b9And all the people of Judah took Uzziah\u00b9, who was sixteen\n years old, and made him king in the room of his father Amaziah.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xiv. 21, _Azariah_.\n\n=1.= _all the people of Judah_] Popular choice does not seem to have\ndetermined the succession to the throne, except when the reigning king\nhad perished by a violent or untimely death, compare xxii. 1.\n\n_Uzziah_] Called \u201cAzariah\u201d in 1 Chronicles iii. 12 and in 2 Kings\n(eight times), but \u201cUzziah\u201d in 2 Kings xv. 13, 32, 34; Isaiah i. 1,\nvi. 1; Hosea i. 1; Amos i. 1; Zechariah xiv. 5. The two forms of the\nname when written in Hebrew consonants closely resemble each other;\nmoreover the meanings of the two are similar, \u201cJah is my strength\u201d\nand \u201cJah hath given help.\u201d Perhaps the king bore both names; compare\n\u201cAbram\u201d and \u201cAbraham\u201d\u2015\u2015\u201cEliakim\u201d and \u201cJehoiakim\u201d (xxxvi. 4).\n\n \u00b2He built Eloth, and restored it to Judah, after that the king\n slept with his fathers.\n\n=2.= _Eloth_] So spelt in viii. 17 (= 1 Kings ix. 26), but \u201cElath\u201d in\nDeuteronomy ii. 8; 2 Kings xiv. 22. In 2 Kings xvi. 6 the two forms are\nfound side by side in one verse.\n\n_after that the king_, etc.] The meaning seems to be it was after king\n_Amaziah_ slept with his fathers that _Uzziah_ his son restored Elath\nto Judah; and it is a natural inference that Uzziah was ruling in\nJerusalem for some while before the death of Amaziah at Lachish left\nhim sole and undisputed king. A considerable time may have elapsed\nbetween Amaziah\u2019s flight and his capture as related in xxv. 27. Yet\nthis is not very likely, and from the position of the present verse\nin Kings it would seem as though the statement in its original context\nshould be interpreted thus: \u201che, _Amaziah_, built Eloth,\u201d etc.; and\nthe king referred to in the clause \u201cafter that the king slept with\nhis fathers\u201d is probably Jeroboam king of Israel (so Barnes on 2 Kings\nxiv. 22).\n\n \u00b3Sixteen years old was Uzziah when he began to reign; and he\n reigned fifty and two years in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name\n was Jechiliah of Jerusalem.\n\n=3.= _Jechiliah_] so the _Keth\u012bb_; the _\u1e32er\u012b_ =Jecoliah= agrees with\nthe parallel passage of Kings.\n\n \u2074And he did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD,\n according to all that his father Amaziah had done.\n\n=4.= _his father Amaziah_] This verse suits its original context in\nKings, for Kings records nothing against Amaziah; it is out of place in\nChronicles, for according to xxv. 14 Amaziah was an idolater.\n\n\n =5\u201210= (not in Kings).\n THE PROSPERITY OF UZZIAH.\n\n=5\u201210.= It is probable that the Chronicler had old and genuine\ntradition to rely on for the account which he here gives of Uzziah\u2019s\nprosperity\u2015\u2015his wars against neighbouring tribes (verses 6\u20128), and\nhis building activity (verses 8\u201210). Doubtless in the earlier years of\nUzziah\u2019s reign Judah was still suffering from the effects of the defeat\ninflicted by Joash of Israel. But the general accuracy of the picture\nof the reign is assured by such facts as (1) the stout resistance\noffered by Jerusalem to the Assyrians in Hezekiah\u2019s time as contrasted\nwith its capture by the Israelites in Amaziah\u2019s reign (xxv. 23);\n(2)\u00a0the frequency of metaphors from building implements and materials\nin the pages of the prophets of this period (e.g. Amos vii. 7 ff.);\n(3)\u00a0the commercial activity and luxury of Jerusalem in the reign of\nUzziah\u2019s successor Ahaz\u2015\u2015witness the writings of Isaiah, _passim_.\n\n \u2075And he set himself to seek God in the days of Zechariah, who\n had understanding\u00b9 in the vision\u00b2 of God: and as long as he\n sought the LORD, God made him to prosper.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _gave instruction_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _the seeing_. Many ancient authorities have, _the\n fear_.\n\n=5.= _Zechariah_] Nothing is known (apart from this passage) of this\nZechariah.\n\n_who had understanding_] margin, \u201cwho gave instruction Hebrew _m\u0113bh\u012bn_,\na word applied to a leader of song (1 Chronicles xv. 22, \u201cskilful\u201d; 1\nChronicles xxv. 7, \u201ccunning\u201d; 1 Chronicles xxv. verse 8, \u201cteacher\u201d).\n\n_in the vision of God_] Read, =in the fear of God= (so LXX., Targum\nPeshit\u1e6da), making a slight correction of the Hebrew text.\n\n \u2076And he went forth and warred against the Philistines, and brake\n down the wall of Gath, and the wall of Jabneh, and the wall of\n Ashdod; and he built cities in _the country of_ Ashdod, and\n among the Philistines.\n\n=6.= _the Philistines_] Compare xvii. 11, xxi. 16, xxviii. 18; 2 Kings\nxviii. 8; 1 Maccabees v. 66\u201268, xiv. 34.\n\n_brake down the wall_] See note on xxv. 23.\n\n_Jabneh_] Mentioned only here in the Old Testament, but probably\nto be identified with \u201cJabneel\u201d (Joshua xv. 11). At a later date\nit was called \u201cJamnia\u201d (2 Maccabees xii. 8), and, after the fall of\nJerusalem in 70 A.D., it became for a while the chief centre of Jewish\nintellectual and religious activities. Its ruins are to be seen about\n10 miles south of Jaffa (Joppa) on the coast. The modern Yebna is a few\nmiles inland. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 122.\n\n_Ashdod_] compare 1 Samuel v. 1 ff.; Isaiah xx. 1; Zephaniah ii. 4;\nNehemiah iv. 7, xxiii. 23; Acts viii, 40 (\u1f0c\u03b6\u03c9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2). Ashdod (modern\n_Esd\u016bd_) was situated between Gaza and Joppa, some three miles from the\nsea.\n\n_in_ the country of _Ashdod_] (literally \u201cin Ashdod\u201d). Perhaps the name\nhas been repeated through an early scribal error and we should read\nsimply \u201cand built cities among the Philistines.\u201d\n\n \u2077And God helped him against the Philistines, and against the\n Arabians that dwelt in Gur-baal, and the Meunim.\n\n=7.= _against the Philistines, and against the Arabians_] \u201cConditions\nin the comparatively small and half-desert land of Judah depended\nessentially on its relations with the Edomite and Arabian tribes on\nthe south-east and with the Philistines on the west\u201d: note how this\ncomes out in the traditions of the period as narrated in Chronicles\nJehoshaphat dominated both Philistines and Arabians (Edomites) (xvii.\n11); but Libnah (near Lachish) and Edom revolted successfully against\nhis son Jehoram (xxi. 10). After the reigns of Ahaziah and Joash,\nAmaziah found himself able to assail Edom and gained a great victory\n(xxv. 11, 12). Later in his reign Amaziah suffered a crushing defeat\nat the hands of Joash of Israel, and it is reasonable to suppose that\nEdom would seize the opportunity to reassert its independence, though\nChronicles is silent on the point. It is therefore in harmony with the\nsequence of events as narrated by the Chronicler, when in the present\nverse (compare verse 2) we are told that Amaziah\u2019s successor, Uzziah,\nreestablished the Judean power over Edom, and that later, against Ahaz,\nEdom and the Philistine cities gained the upper hand (xxviii. 17, 18).\n\n_Gur-baal_] An unidentified place; a \u201cGur\u201d is mentioned in 2 Kings\nix. 27. A slight correction of the Hebrew would give \u201cin Gerar (compare\nGenesis xx. 1) and against the Meunim.\u201d\n\n_Meunim_] compare xx. 1 (note).\n\n \u2078And the Ammonites gave gifts to Uzziah: and his name spread\n abroad even to the entering in of Egypt; for he waxed exceeding\n strong.\n\n=8.= _gave gifts_] i.e. tribute. Compare 1 Chronicles xviii. 2 (note).\n\n \u2079Moreover Uzziah built towers in Jerusalem at the corner gate,\n and at the valley gate, and at the turning _of the wall_, and\n fortified them.\n\n=9.= _towers in Jerusalem_, etc.] The Chronicler is evidently fond\nof recording such traditions; compare xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14; and the\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a07, p. xlviii.\n\n_the corner gate_] At the north-west corner of the walls. Compare xxv.\n23 (note).\n\n_the valley gate_] Nehemiah ii. 13, iii. 13. Probably near the\nsouth-west corner of the walls.\n\n_the turning_ of the wall] Mentioned Nehemiah iii. 19, 24. See G.\u00a0A.\nSmith, _Jerusalem_, II. 120.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And he built towers in the wilderness, and hewed out many\n cisterns, for he had much cattle; in the lowland also, and in\n the plain\u00b9: _and he had_ husbandmen and vinedressers in the\n mountains and in the fruitful fields\u00b2; for he loved husbandry.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _table land_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _Carmel_ See 1 Samuel xxv. 2.\n\n=10.= _the wilderness_] i.e. the southern pasture land of Judah.\nCompare Psalms lxv. 12. Fortified towers have always proved effective\nfor controlling the Bedouin and keeping the desert roads open.\n\n_in the lowland also, and in the plain_] For the \u201clowland\u201d (Hebrew\n_Sheph\u0113lah_) see i. 15 (note). The \u201cplain\u201d (margin =table land=;\nHebrew _Mish\u014dr_) is the name of the high pasture lands east of Jordan;\napparently the part occupied by the Ammonites whom Uzziah had subdued\nis meant here. (For a different view see Smith, _Jerusalem_, II. 119,\nnote.)\n\n\n =11\u201215= (no parallel in Kings).\n UZZIAH\u2019S ARMY.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Moreover Uzziah had an army of fighting men, that went out to\n war by bands, according to the number of their reckoning made\n by Jeiel the scribe and Maaseiah the officer, under the hand\n of Hananiah, one of the king\u2019s captains. \u00b9\u00b2The whole number of\n the heads of fathers\u2019 _houses_, even the mighty men of valour,\n was two thousand and six hundred. \u00b9\u00b3And under their hand was\n a trained army\u00b9, three hundred thousand and seven thousand and\n five hundred, that made war with mighty power, to help the king\n against the enemy.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the power of an army_.\n\n=13.= _three hundred thousand and seven thousand and five hundred_]\nCompare xxv. 5 (Amaziah\u2019s army), and the notes on xiv. 8 and xvii. 14\n(the forces of Asa and of Jehoshaphat).\n\n \u00b9\u2074And Uzziah prepared for them, even for all the host, shields,\n and spears, and helmets, and coats of mail, and bows, and stones\n for slinging.\n\n=14.= _stones for slinging_] Such stones needed to be carefully chosen,\nfor they had to be smooth and of a suitable size, compare 1 Samuel xvii.\n40. Bows and slings appear to have been favourite weapons in Benjamin,\ncompare 1 Chronicles xii. 2; Judges xx. 16.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And he made in Jerusalem engines, invented by cunning men, to\n be on the towers and upon the battlements\u00b9, to shoot arrows and\n great stones withal. And his name spread far abroad; for he was\n marvellously helped, till he was strong.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _corner towers_.\n\n=15.= _engines_] Doubtless contrivances similar to the Roman\n_catapulta_ and _balista_. It is questionable whether such engines\nof war were really in use as early as the time of Uzziah, at least\namong the Israelites (see Smith, _Jerusalem_, ii. 121, 122; and the\n_Encyclopedia Biblia_ s.v. _siege_, especially col. 4510). The next\nreference to similar instruments of war is in 1 Maccabees vi. 51, 52.\n\n_helped_] compare verse 7.\n\n\n =16\u201220= (not in Kings).\n UZZIAH\u2019S PRESUMPTION.\n\n=16\u201220.= Uzziah died from leprosy, as is related in verses 21\u201223\n(= 2 Kings xv. 5\u20127). That terrible disease was always regarded as a\nmanifestation of Divine anger against the sufferer (compare Numbers xii.\n9 ff.; 2 Kings v. 27), but no special cause is assigned in Kings why\nthe disaster befell Uzziah. In the present verses an adequate reason is\nbrought forward\u2015\u2015Uzziah, blinded by the pride of his success, infringed\nthe privileges of the priesthood and was guilty of sacrilege. The\nmotive for some such tale is so strong and the actual sin alleged so\nakin to the Chronicler\u2019s prejudices that it may well be that the tale\noriginated with him or his immediate circle. Yet it is possible that\nthere may be behind the present form of the tale a valid tradition of\na dispute at this period between the hierarchy and the authority of the\nking.\n\n \u00b9\u2076But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up so that he\n did corruptly\u00b9, and he trespassed against the LORD his God; for\n he went into the temple of the LORD to burn incense upon the\n altar of incense.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _to_ his _destruction_.\n\n=16.= _did corruptly_] Compare xxvii. 2.\n\n_he trespassed_] compare xii. 2; Joshua vii. 1, xxii. 16. The Hebrew\nword implies presumptuous dealing with holy things.\n\n_the altar of incense_] Compare Exodus xxx. 1\u201210. Not only the altar,\nbut the incense itself was \u201cmost holy\u201d; Exodus xxx. verses 34\u201238.\n\n \u00b9\u2077And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him\n fourscore priests of the LORD, that were valiant men:\n\n=17.= _Azariah the priest_] i.e. the high-priest (verse 20). He cannot\nbe identified with any priest in the list given 1 Chronicles vi. 4\u201215\n(v. 30\u201241, Hebrew).\n\n \u00b9\u2078and they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It\n pertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the LORD,\n but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to\n burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed;\n neither shall it be for thine honour from the LORD God. \u00b9\u2079Then\n Uzziah was wroth; and he had a censer in his hand to burn\n incense; and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy\n brake forth\u00b9 in his forehead before the priests in the house of\n the LORD, beside the altar of incense.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _rose_ (as the sun).\n\n=18.= _the priests the sons of Aaron_] Compare xiii. 10, 11 and Numbers\nxvi. 40.\n\n_neither shall it be for thine honour_] A euphemism covering a threat\nof danger and disgrace.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked\n upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they\n thrust him out quickly from thence; yea, himself hasted also to\n go out, because the LORD had smitten him.\n\n=20.= _the LORD had smitten him_] So 2 Kings xv. 5.\n\n\n =21\u201223= (= 2 Kings xv. 5\u20127).\n THE END OF UZZIAH.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And Uzziah the king was a leper unto the day of his death,\n and dwelt in a several house\u00b9, being a leper; for he was cut\n off from the house of the LORD: and Jotham his son was over the\n king\u2019s house, judging the people of the land.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _lazar house_.\n\n=21.= _a several house_] i.e. separate, special; compare Numbers xxviii.\n13; Matthew xxv. 15. The same Hebrew word is used in Psalms lxxxviii. 5,\n\u201c_free_ (Revised Version \u2018cast off\u2019) among the dead.\u201d\n\n_cut off_] The same Hebrew word is translated in the same way in Isaiah\nliii. 8.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah\n the prophet, the son of Amoz, write.\n\n=22.= _did Isaiah ... write_] This statement is not in Kings. Uzziah\nis mentioned in Isaiah vi. 1, and this fact may be all that lies behind\nthe present statement. It is utterly improbable that the reference is\nto some writing of Isaiah which has not been preserved. Possibly some\nsection of the midrashic Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel is meant,\npresuming that such a work was known to the Chronicler actually or by\ntradition (see Introduction \u00a7\u00a05, pp. xxxii, xxxvi).\n\n \u00b2\u00b3So Uzziah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his\n fathers in the field of burial which belonged to the kings; for\n they said, He is a leper: and Jotham his son reigned in his\n stead.\n\n=23.= _the field of burial_] i.e. not actually in the tombs of the\nkings, lest they should be defiled, but in ground adjoining the royal\ntombs. Kings has simply \u201cin the city of David.\u201d Compare xxi. 20, xxiv.\n25, xxviii. 27.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVII.\n\n\n =1\u20126= (compare 2 Kings xv. 32\u201235).\n JOTHAM SUCCEEDS.\n\n \u00b9Jotham was twenty and five years old when he began to reign;\n and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem: and his mother\u2019s name\n was Jerushah the daughter of Zadok.\n\n=1.= _he reigned sixteen years_] The years during which he acted as\nregent in place of his father (see above xxvi. 21) are included in the\n_sixteen_. Jotham\u2019s independent reign was probably very brief.\n\n \u00b2And he did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD,\n according to all that his father Uzziah had done: howbeit he\n entered not into the temple of the LORD. And the people did yet\n corruptly.\n\n=2.= _according to all that ... howbeit he entered not into the temple\nof the LORD_] i.e. he imitated Uzziah in all his virtues, but not in\nhis sin against the ritual of the Temple (xxvi. 16 ff.). The clause\n_howbeit_, etc., is not in Kings, since Kings makes no reference to\nUzziah\u2019s transgression.\n\n_did yet corruptly_] In Kings, \u201cHowbeit the high places were not\ntaken away; the people still sacrificed and burned incense in the high\nplaces.\u201d\n\n \u00b3He built the upper gate of the house of the LORD, and on the\n wall of Ophel he built much.\n\n=3.= _the upper gate_] Compare the note on xxiii. 20.\n\n_and on the wall of Ophel he built much_] The statement is made only in\nChronicles Like similar notices of building activity, etc.\u2015\u2015a subject\nof great interest to the Chronicler\u2015\u2015it may possibly have some basis in\nfact; compare xxvi. 9 f., xxxii. 30, xxxiii. 14.\n\n_Ophel_] compare xxxiii. 14; Nehemiah iii. 26, 27. It was a southern\nspur of the Temple Hill. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 31; and Smith,\n_Jerusalem_, i. 152 ff.\n\n \u2074Moreover he built cities in the hill country of Judah, and in\n the forests he built castles and towers.\n\n=4.= _castles_] compare xvii. 12 (note).\n\n \u2075He fought also with the king of the children of Ammon, and\n prevailed against them. And the children of Ammon gave him\n the same year an hundred talents of silver, and ten thousand\n measures\u00b9 of wheat, and ten thousand of barley. So much did the\n children of Ammon render unto him, in the second year also, and\n in the third.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _cors_.\n\n=5.= _the children of Ammon_] Compare xx. 1 ff., xxvi. 8.\n\n_an hundred talents of silver_] Compare 2 Kings xxiii. 33.\n\n_measures_] Hebrew _k\u014dr\u012bm_. A _k\u014dr_ (= a _\u1e25\u014dmer_, Ezekiel xlv. 14,\nRevised Version) was a dry measure holding about 11 bushels.\n\n \u2076So Jotham became mighty, because he ordered his ways before the\n LORD his God.\n\n=6.= _became mighty_] The same Hebrew word as in i. 1 (see note).\n\n\n =7\u20129= (= 2 Kings xv. 36\u201238).\n THE SUMMARY OF JOTHAM\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u2077Now the rest of the acts of Jotham, and all his wars, and\n his ways, behold, they are written in the book of the kings\n of Israel and Judah. \u2078He was five and twenty years old when he\n began to reign, and reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem. \u2079And\n Jotham slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city\n of David: and Ahaz his son reigned in his stead.\n\n=7.= _all his wars_] Only a war with Ammon is mentioned above, but\naccording to 2 Kings xv. 37 the Syro-Ephraimite war also began in\nJotham\u2019s reign. The notices in Kings and Chronicles may be regarded\nas supplementary. Ammon was a natural ally of the Syrians, and perhaps\nthe wording of verse 5 (end) hints that _after_ the third year Ammon\nwas able to refuse to pay tribute. The information of Chronicles is\ntherefore plausible; but it is curious that Chronicles preserves the\none incident and Kings the other. The point is highly significant. Not\nonly does it illustrate very forcibly the comparative independence of\nthe Chronicler\u2019s narrative, which is so marked a feature in these later\nreigns; but also it adds to the evidence in favour of the view that the\nChronicler had traditions before him other than those of Kings. Clearly\nhe had no motive for suppressing the statement of Kings and inventing\ninstead a war with Ammon. We must suppose that he followed some\nauthority independent of Kings.\n\n_the book of the kings_, etc.] Compare xxv. 26, and see Introduction,\n\u00a7\u00a05.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 2 Kings xvi. 1\u20124).\n AHAZ SUCCEEDS AND PRACTISES IDOLATRY.\n\nThe reign of Ahaz is a specially interesting section of Chronicles,\nshowing in a remarkable degree the freedom with which the older\naccounts in 2 Kings xvi. and Isaiah vii. 1 ff. have been handled.\nA tale of a prophet is introduced (verses 9\u201215). Otherwise only one\nnew point is added\u2015\u2015viz. an Edomite and a Philistine invasion (verses\n16\u201218); but all the incidents of the older tradition are altered and\ngiven new settings in such a way as may best serve what is plainly the\nChronicler\u2019s main object, namely by heightening the disasters to show\nthe exceeding sinfulness of sin. For details of the changes, see the\nnotes on verses 5\u20127, 16\u201221, 23, 24.\n\n \u00b9Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign; and he\n reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem: and he did not that which\n was right in the eyes of the LORD, like David his father: \u00b2but\n he walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and made also\n molten images for the Baalim.\n\n=1.= _Ahaz_] The full form of the name is _Jehoahaz_, the \u201cJa-u-\u1e25a-zi\u201d\nof an inscription of Tiglath-pileser IV.\n\n_twenty years old_] As he died sixteen years later leaving a son\nof _twenty-five_ (Hezekiah, xxix. 1), Ahaz would have been only ten\nyears old when Hezekiah was born. The numeral here or in xxix. 1 must\ntherefore be incorrect. The Peshit\u1e6da in this verse reads \u201ctwenty-five\nyears old,\u201d which is more suitable and may be right, but the\ncoincidence would be strange if three kings in succession ascended\nthe throne at twenty-five years of age (compare xxvii. 1 and xxix. 1).\n\n_he did not that which was right_] It is not said of Ahaz as of\nManasseh, the worst of all the Judean kings, that \u201che did that which\nwas evil\u201d (xxxiii. 2).\n\n \u00b3Moreover he burnt incense in the valley of the son of\n Hinnom, and burnt his children in the fire, according to the\n abominations of the heathen, whom the LORD cast out before the\n children of Israel.\n\n=3.= _the valley of the son of Hinnom_] The name in Hebrew\n_G\u0113-ben-hinn\u014dm_ or _G\u0113-hinn\u014dm_ is more familiar in the Greek form\n_Gehenna_ (Matthew v. 22, Revised Version margin). The valley was south\nand south-west of Jerusalem. The evil reputation of the place perhaps\nwas due originally to some connection with the worship of Molech\n(Jeremiah vii. 31, 32). Later it appears that the refuse of Jerusalem\nand the corpses of criminals were deposited in this valley, and as the\nverse Isaiah lxvi. 24 \u201cthey shall go forth, and look upon the carcases\nof the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not\ndie, neither shall their fire be quenched ...\u201d was associated with this\nvalley, the name _Gehenna_ was eventually used to signify the place of\neternal punishment (compare Mark ix. 43).\n\n_burnt his children in the fire_] There is no doubt that actual\nsacrifice of the child\u2019s life by fire is implied in this formula\nand in parallel phrases such as \u201cmade his son to pass through the\nfire\u201d (2 Kings xvi. 3). Unfortunately the gruesome evidence regarding\nchild-sacrifice among the ancients\u2015\u2015Greeks and Romans as well as\nSemites\u2015\u2015is far too strong to allow the theory that always or even\ngenerally branding or some symbolical dedication by fire was employed\n(see Barnes on 1 Kings xi. 5). It seems that the horrible custom, which\nwas common with the early Canaanites and Phoenicians, was very rare\namong the early Israelites and the kindred people of Moab (see Judges\nxi. 31 and 39; 2 Kings iii. 27), and was called forth only by the\npressure of extreme need. Evidently in the break-up of the national\nfaith which attended the imminent downfall of the State of Judah the\nevil authority of Ahaz and Manasseh made the practice common (see\nxxxiii. 6; 2 Kings xxi. 6; Micah vi. 7; Jeremiah vii. 31; Psalms cvi.\n37 f.). Genesis xxii. 1\u201218 may be regarded as a magnificent repudiation\nof the rite in the worship of Jehovah, and the practice is expressly\nforbidden in the Law, Leviticus xviii. 21; Deuteronomy xviii. 10.\n\n_his children_] In Kings, \u201chis son\u201d (singular), a better reading. It is\npossible that the sacrifice was intended to avert the danger threatened\nby the Syro-Ephraimite alliance.\n\n \u2074And he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places, and on\n the hills, and under every green tree.\n\n=4.= _under every green tree_] The Hebrew word here used for \u201cgreen\u201d\n(_ra\u2018an\u0101n_) means rather \u201cflourishing,\u201d the reference being not so\nmuch to colour as to condition and size. Large fine trees (which are\nrarer in the East than in the West) are important landmarks; compare\n1 Chronicles x. 12; Genesis xii. 6, xxxv. 4. In different ways such\ntrees acquired a sacred or semi-sacred character (Genesis xviii. 1,\nxxi. 33; Judges vi. 11); in some cases because they were associated\nwith theophanies, in others perhaps because the flourishing state of\nthe tree was regarded as the sign of the presence of some local deity.\n\u201cNo one can imagine how many voices a tree has who has not come up\nto it from the silence of the great desert,\u201d G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical\nGeography of the Holy Land_, p. 88; compare the same writer\u2019s _Early\nPoetry of Israel_, pp. 32, 33.\n\n\n =5\u20127= (compare 2 Kings xvi. 5\u20129; Isaiah vii. 1\u20129).\n THE SYRO-EPHRAIMITE WAR.\n\nThe Chronicler\u2019s account of the war conveys a very different impression\nfrom the corresponding narrative in 2 Kings. In Kings an invasion by\nthe united forces of Israel and Syria is related. Chronicles records\ntwo separate invasions, each resulting in disaster for Ahaz. In Kings\nthe _failure_ of the allies to take Jerusalem is the chief feature in\nthe account, while in Chronicles the damage and loss inflicted on Judah\ntakes the first place, and the magnitude of the disaster is heightened\nin characteristically midrashic fashion: see the notes below on verses\n5, 6.\n\n \u2075Wherefore the LORD his God delivered him into the hand of the\n king of Syria; and they smote him, and carried away of his a\n great multitude of captives, and brought them to Damascus. And\n he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel, who\n smote him with a great slaughter.\n\n=5.= _the king of Syria_] i.e. Rezin.\n\n_smote him_] From 2 Kings it appears that the Syrian king, (1) helped\nto shut up Ahaz in Jerusalem, (2)\u00a0seized the port of Elath (Eloth) on\nthe Red Sea which had belonged to Judah. Some of the \u201ccaptives\u201d taken\nto Damascus were presumably brought from Elath.\n\n_carried away of his a great multitude of captives_] No doubt captives\nwere taken, some probably from Elath; but the \u201cgreat multitude\u201d is\nmidrashic exaggeration: compare the number of slain stated in verse 6.\n\n_And he was also delivered into the hand of the king of Israel_] 2\nKings records but a _single_ invasion, the forces of Syria and Israel\nbeing confederate. The Chronicler\u2019s phrase implies that two separate\ninvasions and disasters befell Ahaz\u2015\u2015\u201che was _also_ delivered.\u201d\n\n \u2076For Pekah the son of Remaliah slew in Judah an hundred and\n twenty thousand in one day, all of them valiant men; because\n they had forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers.\n\n=6.= _an hundred and twenty thousand in one day_] i.e. more than a\nthird of the host as reckoned in xxvi. 13.\n\n \u2077And Zichri, a mighty man of Ephraim, slew Maaseiah the king\u2019s\n son, and Azrikam the ruler of the house, and Elkanah that was\n next\u00b9 to the king.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _second_.\n\n=7.= _the ruler of the house_] Hebrew _n\u0101g\u012bd_. Probably the head of\nthe king\u2019s household is meant, his \u201cchancellor\u201d; but compare Nehemiah\nxi. 11, \u201cthe ruler (_n\u0101g\u012bd_) of the house of God.\u201d\n\n_next to the king_] compare 1 Samuel xxiii. 17.\n\n\n =8\u201215= (not in Kings).\n ISRAEL SENDS BACK THE JEWISH CAPTIVES.\n\nThe tale of the intervention of Oded, his appeal, the response of the\npeople and the army to the call of conscience, with the consequent\noutburst of pity for the unhappy captives, who are first tended and\nthen restored to their kinsfolk in Judah, is something far better than\nliteral history: it is the product of a moral and religious conviction\nworthy of high admiration. We have, in fact, in these verses a most\nclear instance of that inculcation of great religious principles which\nwas the primary object of the writer of Chronicles. A modern ethical\nteacher, desirous of driving home the eternal verities, may clothe them\nin a story which has no basis whatsoever in actual events but is the\npure product of the writer\u2019s imagination. His ancient counterpart among\nthe Jews started with a nucleus of historical events, which however he\nhandled freely in whatever fashion might best serve to emphasise the\nmoral or religious lesson he desired to teach.\n\nThe deep ethical and spiritual value of this example of how to treat\nthe fallen foe hardly requires comment\u2015\u2015Israel must forgive, if\nit would be forgiven (verse 10); the captives are\u2015\u2015not \u201cthe enemy\u201d\nbut\u2015\u2015\u201cyour brethren\u201d (verse 11); and, when conscience is at last\nawakened, how great is the revulsion, and how nobly do the generous\nqualities of human nature appear, when the captives, laden not with\nthe chains of bondage (verse 10) but with clothing and with food, are\nrestored to their homes in peace.\n\nIt is very evident that the writer of this fine story had in mind the\nno less effective and beautiful narrative of Elisha\u2019s dealing with the\ncaptured Syrian army (2 Kings vi. 21\u201223).\n\n \u2078And the children of Israel carried away captive of their\n brethren two hundred thousand, women, sons, and daughters, and\n took also away much spoil from them, and brought the spoil to\n Samaria.\n\n=8.= _of their brethren_] Compare xi. 4, \u201cye shall not ... fight\n_against your brethren_.\u201d\n\n \u2079But a prophet of the Lord was there, whose name was Oded: and\n he went out to meet the host that came to Samaria, and said unto\n them, Behold, because the LORD, the God of your fathers, was\n wroth with Judah, he hath delivered them into your hand, and ye\n have slain them in a rage which hath reached up unto heaven.\n\n=9.= _a prophet of the LORD was there_] Nothing further is known of\nOded. For similar instances of prophetic activity narrated only in\nChronicles see xv. 1 ff., xvi. 7 ff., xxiv. 20 f., and especially xxv.\n7 ff.\n\n_the LORD ... was wroth ... and ye have slain them in a rage which\nhath reached up unto heaven_] Compare Zechariah i. 15, \u201cI am very sore\ndispleased with the nations that are at ease; for I was but a little\ndispleased, and they helped forward the affliction.\u201d\n\n_heaven_] There is a tendency in some later books of the Bible to write\n\u201cheaven\u201d for \u201cGod\u201d; compare xxxii. 20, \u201cprayed and cried to heaven,\u201d\nalso Daniel iv. 23; and similarly in the New Testament, Luke xv. 18, 21;\nJohn iii. 27: for further references see Grimm and Thayer, _Lexicon of\nthe N.T._, s.v. \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 _ad fin._ From a like feeling of reverence the\nChronicler is sparing in his use of the name \u201cJehovah\u201d; compare xvii. 4.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And now ye purpose to keep under the children of Judah and\n Jerusalem for bondmen and bondwomen unto you: _but_ are there\n not even with you trespasses\u00b9 of your own against the LORD your\n God? \u00b9\u00b9Now hear me therefore, and send back the captives, which\n ye have taken captive of your brethren: for the fierce wrath\n of the LORD is upon you. \u00b9\u00b2Then certain of the heads of the\n children of Ephraim, Azariah the son of Johanan, Berechiah the\n son of Meshillemoth, and Jehizkiah the son of Shallum, and Amasa\n the son of Hadlai, stood up against them that came from the war,\n \u00b9\u00b3and said unto them, Ye shall not bring in the captives hither:\n for ye purpose that which will bring upon us a trespass\u00b2 against\n the LORD, to add unto our sins and to our trespass\u00b2: for our\n trespass\u00b2 is great, and there is fierce wrath against Israel.\n \u00b9\u2074So the armed men left the captives and the spoil before the\n princes and all the congregation.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _guiltinesses_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _guilt_.\n\n=10.= _keep under_] In Nehemiah v. 5, the same Hebrew word is\ntranslated, \u201cbring into bondage\u201d; compare Ryle\u2019s note on Hebrew\nslavery _in loco_. One Hebrew might hold another Hebrew as a slave for\na limited period, but in the present passage the case is of one part of\nthe people taking advantage of the fortune of war to reduce to slavery\nthousands of their fellow-countrymen.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the men which have been expressed by name rose up, and\n took the captives, and with the spoil clothed all that were\n naked among them, and arrayed them, and shod them, and gave\n them to eat and to drink, and anointed them, and carried all\n the feeble of them upon asses, and brought them to Jericho, the\n city of palm trees, unto their brethren: then they returned to\n Samaria.\n\n=15.= _have been expressed_] The phrase is characteristic of the\nChronicler; compare xxxi. 19; 1 Chronicles xii. 31, xvi. 41; Ezra\nviii. 20.\n\n_took the captives_] Render, =took hold of the captives=; i.e.\nsuccoured them; LXX. \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, compare Hebrew ii. 16 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 =\n\u201che taketh hold of.\u201d\n\n_to eat and to drink_] Compare 2 Kings vi. 23.\n\n_anointed them_] Part of the host\u2019s duty; compare Luke vii. 44\u201246.\n\n_to Jericho_] Jericho perhaps belonged to the Northern Kingdom; compare\n1 Kings xvi. 34; 2 Kings ii. 4. A road led to it from Mount Ephraim\npast _\u2018Ain ed-Duk_. G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Historical Geography of the Holy\nLand_, pp. 266 ff.\n\n_the city of palm trees_] Compare Deuteronomy xxxiv. 3. The phrase\nis an alternative name of Jericho; compare Judges i. 16, iii. 13.\nDate palms were common in Jericho down to the seventh century of the\nChristian era. B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, pp. 128 f.\n\n\n =16\u201221= (= 2 Kings xvi. 7\u20129).\n AHAZ INVOKES ASSYRIAN AID.\n\nThere is an important variation here between Chronicles and Kings.\nAccording to Chronicles (verse 21) Ahaz gained nothing by his tribute\nto the king of Assyria; according to Kings the Assyrian accepted the\noffering and marched against Syria, capturing Damascus and slaying\nRezin. Further in Chronicles it is said that the help of Assyria was\ninvoked, not against the kings of Syria and Israel as in 2 Kings,\nbut against Edomites and Philistines. Some alteration was required in\nconsequence of the insertion in Chronicles of the midrashic narrative\nof verses 8\u201215, according to which Ahaz was delivered from his disaster\nat the hands of Israel not by the king of Assyria (so Kings) but\nsimply through the awakening of Israel\u2019s conscience and the consequent\nrelease of the captives and the spoil. If therefore the Chronicler was\nto introduce the story of Ahaz\u2019 appeal to Assyria, he could only do\nso by supplying new enemies for Ahaz to combat. These, however, were\nappropriately found in the Philistines and Edomites, regarding whom the\nChronicler seems to have had various traditions (see notes on xxi. 8,\n16, xxvi. 6).\n\n \u00b9\u2076At that time did king Ahaz send unto the kings\u00b9 of Assyria to\n help him. \u00b9\u2077For again the Edomites had come and smitten Judah,\n and carried away captives\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 Many ancient authorities read, _king_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _a captivity_.\n\n=16.= _the kings_] LXX. \u201cking\u201d (singular). This monarch was\nTiglath-pileser IV; compare 1 Kings xvi. 7.\n\n \u00b9\u2078The Philistines also had invaded the cities of the lowland,\n and of the South of Judah, and had taken Beth-shemesh, and\n Aijalon, and Gederoth, and Soco with the towns\u00b9 thereof, and\n Timnah with the towns\u00b9 thereof, Gimzo also and the towns\u00b9\n thereof: and they dwelt there.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _daughters_.\n\n=18.= _had invaded_] Rather, =raided=.\n\n_the lowland_] Hebrew _Sheph\u0113l\u0101h_. Compare i. 15 (note).\n\n_Beth-shemesh_] compare 1 Chronicles vi. 59 [44, Hebrew], note.\n\n_Aijalon_] compare xi. 10.\n\n_Gederoth_] Joshua xv. 41.\n\n_Soco_] compare xi. 7.\n\n_Timnah_] Joshua xv. 10; Judges xiv. 1 ff.\n\n_Gimzo_] The modern _Jimzu_ south-east of Lydda, B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075,\np. 18. The place is not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament.\n\n \u00b9\u2079For the LORD brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of Israel;\n for he had dealt wantonly\u00b9 in Judah, and trespassed sore against\n the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _cast away restraint_.\n\n=19.= _king of Israel_] Compare xi. 3 (note).\n\n_he had dealt wantonly_] margin \u201ccast away restraint.\u201d Compare Exodus\nxxxii. 25 (Authorized Version and Revised Version) where the same\nHebrew verb is twice used.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria came unto\u00b9 him, and\n distressed him, but strengthened him not\u00b2. \u00b2\u00b9For Ahaz took away\n a portion out of the house of the LORD, and out of the house\n of the king and of the princes, and gave it unto the king of\n Assyria: but it helped him not.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _against_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _prevailed not against him_.\n\n=20.= _Tilgath-pilneser_] i.e. Tiglath-pileser IV. Compare 1 Chronicles\nv. 6 (note).\n\n_came ... him not_] Tiglath-pileser, invoked as an ally, is here\nrepresented as having come as an unscrupulous oppressor, accepting\nthe bribe and not fulfilling the task for which he was paid by Ahaz\n(verse 21). But neither 2 Kings nor the Assyrian records relate\nthat Tiglath-pileser thus came into Judah; and it must be remarked\nthat the Hebrew text in this verse does not inspire confidence. Any\ninterpretation is accordingly rendered uncertain.\n\n\n =22\u201225= (compare 2 Kings xvi. 10\u201218).\n APOSTASY OF AHAZ.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And in the time of his distress\u00b9 did he trespass yet more\n against the LORD, this same king Ahaz. \u00b2\u00b3For he sacrificed unto\n the gods of Damascus\u00b2, which smote him: and he said, Because\n the gods of the kings of Syria helped them, _therefore_ will I\n sacrifice to them, that they may help me. But they were the ruin\n of him, and of all Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _that he distressed him_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _Darmesek_.\n\n=23.= _the gods of Damascus_] In 2 Kings the statement is merely\nthat Ahaz made a copy of an altar which he saw at Damascus, and\nsacrificed upon it. The altar at Damascus was probably the one used\nby Tiglath-pileser and therefore an Assyrian rather than a Damascene\naltar. The use of such an altar was an act of apostasy from Jehovah,\nfor a foreign altar implied a foreign god; compare 2 Kings v. 17.\n\n_the gods ... which smote him_] Early passages of the Old Testament\nshow that the Israelites for long believed the gods of other peoples\nto be no less real than Jehovah. Later, when the teaching of the\ngreat prophets had impressed on the people the sense of Jehovah\u2019s\nsupreme majesty, the alien deities, though still conceived as real\nBeings holding sway over the nations worshipping them, were felt to\nbe incomparable with Jehovah, hardly deserving therefore the title of\nGod. Still later, in certain circles, all reality whatever was denied\nto the gods of the heathen; they were nothing at all (compare Isaiah\nxl.\u2012xlviii., _passim_). Almost certainly the last opinion would be the\nbelief of the Chronicler and of _most_ orthodox Jews of his time; so\nthat it is unnecessary to suppose that the present phrase \u201cwhich smote\nhim\u201d is more than a convenient way of speaking. It does not indicate\nthat the Chronicler, or even his source in Kings, believed in the\nexistence of these gods of Damascus. On the other hand the Chronicler\n(and his source) does imply in this verse that _Ahaz_ had a lively\nbelief in the efficacy and reality of the gods of his foes; and therein\nno doubt he correctly represents the condition of thought in that\nperiod.\n\n_the gods of the kings of Syria helped them_] At this time the Syrians\nof Damascus had been conquered by the Assyrians under Tiglath-pileser\n(2 Kings xvi. 9), so that either we must suppose a confusion in the\nChronicler\u2019s mind, or else the statement needs to be corrected by\nreading \u201ckings of _Assyria_ (Asshur)\u201d for \u201ckings of _Syria_ (Aram).\u201d\nThe reading \u201cSyria\u201d might be due to some writer or scribe, who lived at\na time when one Empire extended from Babylon to the Mediterranean and\nincluded both Syria and Assyria. Such was the case under the Persians\nand under the successors of Alexander down to the time of the Maccabees.\nThe Romans similarly failed at first to distinguish the ancient empire\neast of the Euphrates, i.e. Assyria (= Asshur), from the peoples west\nof the Euphrates, the Arameans, whom they mistakenly called \u201cSyrians\u201d\n(a shortened form of \u201cAssyrians\u201d), whose chief cities were Antioch,\nHamath, and Damascus. This use of \u201cSyrian\u201d has passed over into English,\nbut the more accurate designation is \u201cAramean\u201d; compare Genesis xxviii.\n5 (Revised Version).\n\n_helped them_] Render \u201chelp them.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u2074And Ahaz gathered together the vessels of the house of God,\n and cut in pieces the vessels of the house of God, and shut up\n the doors of the house of the LORD; and he made him altars in\n every corner of Jerusalem.\n\n=24.= _cut in pieces the vessels_] Presumably in order to smelt them\nand put the metal to other uses; compare 2 Kings xxiv. 13. According\nto 2 Kings xvi. 17 Ahaz merely \u201ccut off the borders (\u2018panels\u2019 Revised\nVersion margin) of the bases and removed the laver from off them, and\ntook down the sea from off the brasen oxen that were under it, and put\nit upon a pavement of stone.\u201d In Chronicles something more than this is\nintended, for \u201cthe vessels\u201d would naturally mean such vessels as are\nmentioned in 2 Kings xxiv. 13.\n\n_shut up the doors_] The Chronicler possibly derives his statement from\nthe difficult passage 2 Kings xvi. 18 (_vide_ Authorized Version and\nRevised Version). That passage, however, speaks merely of an alteration\ncarried out by Ahaz on one of the entrances to the Temple, but says\nnothing of a complete closing of the Temple; indeed it may be gathered\nfrom 2 Kings xvi. 14\u201216 that the Temple was not closed and that the\ndaily service went on, _with the great change_ that the king\u2019s new\naltar was used instead of the brasen altar. The Chronicler, unwilling\nto suppose so horrible a desecration of the Temple as the performance\nof Ahaz\u2019 idolatries within its precincts would involve, placed these\nrites outside the area of the Temple and expressly asserts that the\nTemple was closed.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And in every several city of Judah he made high places to burn\n incense unto other gods, and provoked to anger the LORD, the God\n of his fathers.\n\n=25.= _in every several city_] Compare Jeremiah ii. 28.\n\n\n =26, 27= (= 2 Kings xvi. 19, 20).\n THE END OF AHAZ.\n\n \u00b2\u2076Now the rest of his acts, and all his ways, first and last,\n behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Judah and\n Israel. \u00b2\u2077And Ahaz slept with his fathers, and they buried him\n in the city, even in Jerusalem; for they brought him not into\n the sepulchres of the kings of Israel: and Hezekiah his son\n reigned in his stead.\n\n=27.= _they brought him not into the sepulchres of the kings of\nIsrael_] An alteration of 2 Kings which says that Ahaz \u201cwas buried\nwith his fathers.\u201d Compare xxi. 20, xxiv. 25, xxvi. 23.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIX.\n\n\n =1, 2= (= 2 Kings xviii. 1\u20123).\n THE REIGN OF HEZEKIAH.\n\nThe reign of Hezekiah is related in chapters xxix.\u2012xxxii. Of this\nsection chapters xxix., xxx., and xxxi. furnish new material with\nthe exception of only three verses, xxix. 1, 2; xxx. 1. This new\nmaterial describes first, the reopening and cleansing of the Temple\nand the restoration of worship therein (xxix.); secondly, a solemn and\nmagnificent celebration of the Passover (xxx.); and thirdly, a crusade\nagainst idolatrous shrines and images, followed by a reorganisation\nof the arrangements for the support of the priests and Levites\u2015\u2015all\necclesiastical topics dear to the heart of the Chronicler. These\nchapters throughout are in the spirit of the Chronicler, the incidents\nare generally conceived after the fashion of the ideas of his period,\nthe language bears frequent marks of his characteristic style; and\naltogether there is no adequate reason to suppose that these incidents\nare historically true, or even are derived by the Chronicler from\nold tradition. They are probably his own free composition. Minor\nconsiderations point to the same conclusion (see note on xxix. 3\nbelow); and the favourable verdict which in Kings is passed upon\nHezekiah may be reckoned a satisfactory motive and a sufficient source\nfor the Chronicler\u2019s narrative. According to Kings (2 Kings xviii. 3\u20126)\nHezekiah \u201cremoved the high places ... and cut down the Asherah, and\nbrake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made.... He trusted\nin the LORD, the God of Israel; so that after him was none like him\namong all the kings of Judah, nor among them that were before him\u201d; a\neulogy sufficiently glowing to warrant the assumption that Hezekiah\nmust also have done all those other things which seemed to the\nChronicler natural for so pious a monarch to do, and which accordingly\nare here related.\n\n \u00b9Hezekiah began to reign when he was five and twenty years old;\n and he reigned nine and twenty years in Jerusalem: and his\n mother\u2019s name was Abijah the daughter of Zechariah. \u00b2And he did\n that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, according to all\n that David his father had done.\n\n=1.= _Hezekiah_] Hebrew \u201cYehizkiah\u201d (so usually in the Hebrew text of\nChronicles). \u201cHezekiah\u201d (Hebrew \u201cHizkiah\u201d), the form of the name in\nKings, is conveniently used in the English versions of Chronicles in\nplace of the less familiar \u201cYehizkiah.\u201d\n\n_Abijah_] In 2 Kings \u201cAbi\u201d which is probably only a shortened form of\nthe name.\n\n\n =3\u201211= (not in 2 Kings).\n HEZEKIAH COMMANDS TO CLEANSE THE TEMPLE.\n\n \u00b3He in the first year of his reign, in the first month, opened\n the doors of the house of the LORD, and repaired them.\n\n=3.= _in the first month_] i.e. in Nisan; compare xxx. 2, 3.\n\n_opened the doors_] The reopening was a necessary sequel to the\nChronicler\u2019s assertion (xxviii. 24) that Ahaz closed the Temple. If\ntherefore the supposed closing was unhistorical (see note, xxviii. 24)\nthe reopening must be equally so. The notion, however, served the\nChronicler admirably, enabling him to enhance the piety of Hezekiah by\na full description of the restoration of the Temple services.\n\n \u2074And he brought in the priests and the Levites, and gathered\n them together into the broad place on the east,\n\n=4.= _into the broad place on the east_] The place meant was part of\nthe Temple area, the space before the water-gate; compare Ezra x. 9,\n\u201cthe broad place before the house of God\u201d (Revised Version).\n\n \u2075and said unto them, Hear me, ye Levites; now sanctify\n yourselves, and sanctify the house of the LORD, the God of your\n fathers, and carry forth the filthiness out of the holy place.\n\n=5.= _now sanctify yourselves_] Compare Exodus xix. 10\u201215.\n\n \u2076For our fathers have trespassed, and done that which was evil\n in the sight of the LORD our God, and have forsaken him, and\n have turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD,\n and turned their backs.\n\n=6.= _from the habitation of the LORD_] Compare xxiv. 18 \u201cthey forsook\nthe house of the LORD\u201d (see note).\n\n_habitation_] Hebrew \u201ctabernacle,\u201d as in Exodus xxv. 9, al.\n\n \u2077Also they have shut up the doors of the porch, and put out the\n lamps, and have not burned incense nor offered burnt offerings\n in the holy place unto the God of Israel.\n\n=7.= Contrast 2 Kings xvi. 10\u201216, where Ahaz appears as an innovator in\nritual but also as a zealous advocate of worship in the Temple.\n\n_the lamps_] compare xiii. 11; Exodus xxv. 31 ff.\n\n \u2078Wherefore the wrath of the LORD was upon Judah and Jerusalem,\n and he hath delivered them to be tossed to and fro\u00b9, to be an\n astonishment, and an hissing, as ye see with your eyes.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _a terror_.\n\n=8.= _to be tossed to and fro_] Better, as margin, =to be a terror= (or\n\u201ccause of trembling\u201d). The judgement on Israel fills the surrounding\nnations with trembling for themselves. The rendering of the text\n\u201ctossed to and fro\u201d is inferior because the Hebrew word describes\n\u201ctrembling\u201d and not \u201cmotion from place to place.\u201d\n\n \u2079For, lo, our fathers have fallen by the sword, and our sons and\n our daughters and our wives are in captivity for this. \u00b9\u2070Now it\n is in mine heart to make a covenant with the LORD, the God of\n Israel, that his fierce anger may turn away from us.\n\n=10.= _a covenant_] Compare xv. 12.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9My sons, be not now negligent: for the LORD hath chosen you\n to stand before him, to minister unto him, and that ye should be\n his ministers, and burn incense.\n\n=11.= _to stand before him_] Deuteronomy x. 8.\n\n\n =12\u201219= (not in 2 Kings).\n THE CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE.\n\nWith this passage compare 1 Maccabees iv. 36\u201251 (the cleansing of the\nTemple by Judas Maccabeus).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Then the Levites arose, Mahath the son of Amasai, and Joel\n the son of Azariah, of the sons of the Kohathites: and of the\n sons of Merari, Kish the son of Abdi, and Azariah the son of\n Jehallelel: and of the Gershonites, Joah the son of Zimmah, and\n Eden the son of Joah: \u00b9\u00b3and of the sons of Elizaphan, Shimri and\n Jeuel: and of the sons of Asaph, Zechariah and Mattaniah: \u00b9\u2074and\n of the sons of Heman, Jehuel and Shimei: and of the sons of\n Jeduthun, Shemaiah and Uzziel.\n\n=12.= _the Levites_] The fourteen persons mentioned in these three\nverses comprise (a)\u00a0two representatives each of the three great\nbranches of Levi, namely, Kohath, Merari, and Gershon, (b)\u00a0two\nrepresentatives of the great Kohathite family of Elizaphan (compare\nNumbers iii. 30 and 1 Chronicles xv. 8), (c)\u00a0two representatives each\nof the three divisions of the singers, Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun\n(1 Chronicles xxv. 1).\n\n \u00b9\u2075And they gathered their brethren, and sanctified themselves,\n and went in, according to the commandment of the king by the\n words of the LORD, to cleanse the house of the LORD.\n\n=15.= _by the words of the LORD_] i.e. the king\u2019s command was\nrecognised to be in accordance with the Divine will. Read =by the\nword=; the plural _words_ is probably only a textual error.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And the priests went in unto the inner part of the house of\n the LORD, to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness\n that they found in the temple of the LORD into the court of\n the house of the LORD. And the Levites took it, to carry it out\n abroad to the brook Kidron.\n\n=16.= _the priests_] The work was so divided between priests and\nLevites that only the priests went into the house.\n\n_unto the inner part of the house_] Render, =within the house=. The\nreference is not to the Holy of Holies specially, but to the whole\ninterior of the house.\n\n_uncleanness_] compare verse 5; Isaiah xxx. 22.\n\n_to the brook Kidron_] The brook Kidron is the deep valley on the east\nof Jerusalem separating it from the Mount of Olives; 2 Samuel xv. 23;\nJohn xviii. 1. It was treated as an unclean spot, compare xv. 16.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Now they began on the first _day_ of the first month to\n sanctify, and on the eighth day of the month came they to the\n porch of the LORD; and they sanctified the house of the LORD\n in eight days: and on the sixteenth day of the first month they\n made an end.\n\n=17.= _to sanctify ... and they sanctified_] Two periods of eight days\neach were spent in \u201csanctifying,\u201d the courts apparently requiring eight\ndays and the house itself eight days.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Then they went in to Hezekiah the king within _the palace_,\n and said, We have cleansed all the house of the LORD, and the\n altar of burnt offering, with all the vessels thereof, and the\n table of shewbread, with all the vessels thereof.\n\n=18.= _the table of shewbread_] Compare iv. 8 (note), 19; 1 Chronicles\nxxviii. 16\u2015\u2015\u201cthe _tables_ of shewbread.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2079Moreover all the vessels, which king Ahaz in his reign did\n cast away when he trespassed, have we prepared and sanctified;\n and, behold, they are before the altar of the LORD.\n\n=19.= _cast away_] According to xxviii. 24, \u201ccut in pieces\u201d; compare\n2 Kings xvi. 17. The reference is probably to the \u201cbases\u201d and the\n\u201csea.\u201d\n\n_have we prepared_] Render, =have we set up=. Ahaz had taken away the\nsupports both of the laver and of the sea (2 Kings xvi. 17).\n\n\n =20\u201224= (not in 2 Kings).\n THE SEVENFOLD SACRIFICE FOR THE RECONCILIATION OF THE PEOPLE.\n\nThe ritual of the sin offering is fully given in Leviticus iv. Ahaz had\nbroken the covenant, and Hezekiah\u2019s sin offering was intended to atone\nfor the breach.\n\n \u00b2\u2070Then Hezekiah the king arose early, and gathered the princes\n of the city, and went up to the house of the LORD. \u00b2\u00b9And they\n brought seven bullocks, and seven rams, and seven lambs, and\n seven he-goats, for a sin offering for the kingdom and for the\n sanctuary and for Judah. And he commanded the priests the sons\n of Aaron to offer them on the altar of the LORD.\n\n=21.= _they brought_] As the sacrifice was not for an individual but\nfor a whole people the offering on this occasion consisted of seven\nof each of four different sacrificial animals, the bullocks, rams, and\nlambs being used for the burnt offering (verses 22 and 24), and the\nhe-goats for the special sin offering (verse 23).\n\n_for the kingdom_] i.e. for the kingly house.\n\n_for the sanctuary_] i.e. for the Temple (compare Leviticus xvi. 16),\nbut probably inclusive of the personnel of the Temple, i.e. the priests\nand Levites, since otherwise they would have been passed over in the\ngreat sin offering.\n\n_on the altar of the LORD_] Not on the altar of Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 11).\n\n \u00b2\u00b2So they killed the bullocks, and the priests received the\n blood, and sprinkled it on the altar: and they killed the rams,\n and sprinkled the blood upon the altar: they killed also the\n lambs, and sprinkled the blood upon the altar.\n\n=22.= _received the blood_] In basons with which they _dashed_ (not\nas the text \u201csprinkled\u201d) the blood against the altar. This dashing was\ndifferent from the sprinkling with the finger.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And they brought near the he-goats for the sin offering\n before the king and the congregation; and they laid their hands\n upon them: \u00b2\u2074and the priests killed them, and they made a sin\n offering with their blood upon the altar, to make atonement for\n all Israel: for the king commanded _that_ the burnt offering and\n the sin offering _should be made_ for all Israel.\n\n=23.= _brought near_] i.e. to the king and the people.\n\n_and they laid their hands_] \u201cthey\u201d = the representatives of the people,\nfor whom the sacrifice was to be offered, compare Leviticus iv. 15.\n\n\n =25\u201230.=\n THE LEVITICAL SERVICE OF MUSIC.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And he set the Levites in the house of the LORD with cymbals,\n with psalteries, and with harps, according to the commandment of\n David, and of Gad the king\u2019s seer, and Nathan the prophet: for\n the commandment was of the LORD by his prophets.\n\n=25.= _and of Gad ... and Nathan_] Neither of these prophets is\nelsewhere said to have had a part in inciting David to the organisation\nof the Temple music with which the Chronicler credits him. Their names\nare introduced in order to emphasise the value of the musicians of\nthe Temple, whose service is thus declared to have arisen through the\ninspiration of prophets; compare 1 Chronicles xxviii. 19.\n\n \u00b2\u2076And the Levites stood with the instruments of David, and the\n priests with the trumpets.\n\n=26.= _with the instruments_] LXX. \u1f10\u03bd \u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2. Compare 1 Chronicles\nxxiii. 5.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And Hezekiah commanded to offer the burnt offering upon the\n altar. And when the burnt offering began, the song of the LORD\n began also, and the trumpets, together with the instruments of\n David king of Israel. \u00b2\u2078And all the congregation worshipped,\n and the singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded; all this\n _continued_ until the burnt offering was finished.\n\n=27.= _and the trumpets_] Compare 1 Chronicles xv. 24 (note).\n\n_together with the instruments of David_] Render perhaps, =even\naccording to the guidance of the instrument of David=, i.e. led (or\n\u201caccompanied\u201d) by them.\n\n \u00b2\u2079And when they had made an end of offering, the king and all\n that were present with him bowed themselves and worshipped.\n\n=29.= _bowed themselves and worshipped_] i.e. first bowed down (on\ntheir knees) and then completely prostrated themselves.\n\n \u00b3\u2070Moreover Hezekiah the king and the princes commanded the\n Levites to sing praises unto the LORD with the words of David,\n and of Asaph the seer. And they sang praises with gladness, and\n they bowed their heads and worshipped.\n\n=30.= _to sing praises_] Since (1)\u00a0the Hebrew word for \u201cPsalms\u201d means\n\u201cPraises,\u201d and (2)\u00a0the words of _David_ and _Asaph_ are specially\nmentioned in this verse, it is clear that the Chronicler by this phrase\nmeans \u201cto sing _Psalms_.\u201d\n\n\n =31\u201236= (not in Kings).\n A GREAT SACRIFICE OF BURNT OFFERINGS AND THANK OFFERINGS.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Then Hezekiah answered and said, Now ye have consecrated\n yourselves\u00b9 unto the LORD, come near and bring sacrifices and\n thank offerings into the house of the LORD. And the congregation\n brought in sacrifices and thank offerings; and as many as were\n of a willing heart _brought_ burnt offerings. \u00b3\u00b2And the number\n of the burnt offerings, which the congregation brought, was\n threescore and ten bullocks, an hundred rams, and two hundred\n lambs: all these were for a burnt offering to the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _filled your hand_.\n\n=31.= _answered and said_] i.e. answered the thoughts or expectation\nof the people as expressed by the Sacrifices and the Songs; compare Job\niii. 2 (Revised Version).\n\n_ye have consecrated yourselves_] Hebrew \u201cfilled your hand\u201d; compare\nxiii. 9; Exodus xxviii. 41.\n\n_sacrifices and thank offerings_] The phrase means simply the special\ntype of sacrifices which were termed \u201cthank offerings.\u201d The fat of\nsuch offerings was burnt on the altar, the breast and right thigh were\nreserved for the priests, but the remainder belonged to the offerer and\nwas used for a joyous meal (Leviticus vii. 12 ff.). The burnt offering\nwas entirely consumed on the altar, no portion being kept by priests\nor offerer (Leviticus i. 1\u201213): hence such sacrifices represented a\ngreater cost and are accordingly said to be given by those who were\n\u201cof willing heart,\u201d i.e. conspicuously pious and generous.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And the consecrated things were six hundred oxen and three\n thousand sheep.\n\n=33.= _the consecrated things_] The term was applied (1)\u00a0to gold and\nother valuables offered in the Temple; compare xv. 18; 1 Chronicles\nxviii. 8\u201211; (2)\u00a0to those parts of the various sacrifices which were\nassigned to be eaten by the priests; Leviticus xxi. 22 (\u201cthe holy\n[bread]\u201d), xxii. 2, 3, 15 (\u201cthe holy things\u201d). Here the reference is\nmore general, i.e. to the thank offerings (verse 35) themselves.\n\n \u00b3\u2074But the priests were too few, so that they could not flay all\n the burnt offerings: wherefore their brethren the Levites did\n help them, till the work was ended, and until the priests had\n sanctified themselves: for the Levites were more upright in\n heart to sanctify themselves than the priests.\n\n=34.= _the priests_] According to Leviticus i. 5 f. the task of flaying\nthe sacrifice was to be performed by the offerer. Either this passage\nmarks a later stage in the customary ritual, or perhaps this occasion\nwas regarded by the Chronicler as exceptional because the offerings\nwere brought on behalf of the \u201ccongregation\u201d in general. The verse\npresents other difficult features. Who were the priests who had not yet\nsanctified themselves? What is the significance of the evident contrast\nbetween the attitude of the priests and that of the Levites, to the\ndisadvantage of the former? It would seem that there were priests who\nhad deliberately or slackly failed to comply with Hezekiah\u2019s injunction\n(verses 4, 5) and were therefore still ritually unclean from the\npollution of the previous reign. In general we infer that the Levites\nhad either been less deeply involved in the idolatries of Ahaz or at\nleast were more zealous than the priests for the restoration of the\nworship of Jehovah alone. Possibly this tradition may truly represent\nthe historical facts; or it may be an inference derived from 2 Kings\nxvi. 16 where the subservience of the high-priest Urijah to king Ahaz\nis mentioned (so Kittel). Less probable is the view of Benzinger that\nthis verse has been added by the Chronicler to the midrashic source\nupon which he is here depending, and that it represents merely the\nChronicler\u2019s personal predilection for the Levites as distinct from\nthe priests.\n\n \u00b3\u2075And also the burnt offerings were in abundance, with the fat\n of the peace offerings, and with the drink offerings for every\n burnt offering. So the service of the house of the LORD was set\n in order.\n\n=35.= _with the fat_] Compare vii. 7; Leviticus iii. 3, 17.\n\n_the peace offerings_] i.e. the thank offerings (verse 31).\n\n_drink offerings_] compare Numbers xv. 5, 7, 10. The offering was to be\nof wine, and the quantity used was to correspond with the size of the\nanimal sacrificed.\n\n_was set in order_] i.e. was re-established.\n\n \u00b3\u2076And Hezekiah rejoiced, and all the people, because of that\n which God had prepared for the people: for the thing was done\n suddenly.\n\n=36.= _that which God had prepared for the people_] It was God, not\nHezekiah, who had done it all.\n\n_suddenly_] In the very first year of Hezekiah\u2019s reign (verse 3).\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXX.\n\n\n =1\u201212= (not in 2 Kings).\n HEZEKIAH INVITES ALL ISRAEL TO KEEP THE PASSOVER.\n\nFrom verse 2 it appears that this Passover took place in the first\nyear of Hezekiah while the Northern Kingdom was still standing.\nThe invitation to share in it at Jerusalem which Hezekiah is here\n(verse 1) said to have sent to north Israel is opposed to all historic\nprobability. The Chronicler, however, was little likely to be troubled\nby that difficulty, even if he had observed it (see note, verse 5).\nFurthermore it is a plausible suggestion that the references to Ephraim,\nManasseh, etc. in verses 1, 10, 11, 18 really reflect conditions of the\nChronicler\u2019s own circumstances, regarding which see the note on xv. 9.\nIt is therefore a mistake to suggest that the date may be wrong and\nthat the Passover really took place in the sixth year of Hezekiah after\nthe fall of Samaria on the ground that the invitation would then be\nmore credible.\n\n \u00b9And Hezekiah sent to all Israel and Judah, and wrote letters\n also to Ephraim and Manasseh, that they should come to the house\n of the LORD at Jerusalem, to keep the passover unto the LORD,\n the God of Israel. \u00b2For the king had taken counsel, and his\n princes, and all the congregation in Jerusalem, to keep the\n passover in the second month.\n\n=2.= _in the second month_] The Law allowed such a postponement;\ncompare Numbers ix. 10, 11.\n\n \u00b3For they could not keep it at that time, because the priests\n had not sanctified themselves in sufficient number, neither\n had the people gathered themselves together to Jerusalem. \u2074And\n the thing was right in the eyes of the king and of all the\n congregation.\n\n=3.= _at that time_] In the first month.\n\n \u2075So they established a decree to make proclamation throughout\n all Israel, from Beer-sheba even to Dan, that they should\n come to keep the passover unto the LORD, the God of Israel, at\n Jerusalem: for they had not kept it in great numbers\u00b9 in such\n sort as it is written.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _of a long time_.\n\n=5.= _to make proclamation_] A phrase characteristic of the Chronicler.\n\n_from Beer-sheba even to Dan_] i.e. the extreme points of the undivided\nkingdom of David and Solomon. \u201cThe existence of the North Kingdom\nis either ignored or more probably the writer assumed that it had\nalready fallen\u201d (Curtis). On the origin of the phrase and the order in\nChronicles (_Beer-sheba to Dan_ not _Dan to Beer-sheba_, as in 2 Samuel\nxxiv. 2, etc.) see Hogg in the _Expositor_, 1898, pp. 411\u2012421.\n\n_they had not kept it in great numbers in such sort as it is written_]\nThe statement applies to Israel, not to Judah; for the first time an\nattempt is made to draw Israel _en masse_ to a regular Passover at\nJerusalem.\n\n \u2076So the posts went with the letters from the king and his\n princes throughout all Israel and Judah, and according to the\n commandment of the king, saying, Ye children of Israel, turn\n again unto the LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, that\n he may return to the remnant that are escaped of you out of the\n hand of the kings of Assyria.\n\n=6.= _the posts_] Literally \u201cthe runners.\u201d\n\n_the remnant that are escaped of you out of the hand of the kings\nof Assyria_] The phrase applies most naturally to the final downfall\nof Samaria through Shalmaneser and Sargon (722\u2012721 B.C.), but it is\npossible of course to interpret it of the repeated disasters at the\nhands of the Assyrians in the time of Tiglath-pileser some ten years\nearlier.\n\n \u2077And be not ye like your fathers, and like your brethren, which\n trespassed against the LORD, the God of their fathers, so that\n he gave them up to desolation\u00b9, as ye see.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _to be an astonishment_.\n\n=7.= _to desolation_] Render, as margin, =to be an astonishment=;\ncompare xxix. 8 (same Hebrew word).\n\n \u2078Now be ye not stiffnecked, as your fathers were; but yield\n yourselves\u00b9 unto the LORD, and enter into his sanctuary, which\n he hath sanctified for ever, and serve the LORD your God, that\n his fierce anger may turn away from you.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _give the hand_.\n\n=8.= _yield yourselves_] Literally \u201cgive the hand\u201d; compare\n1 Chronicles xxix. 24 \u201csubmitted themselves\u201d).\n\n_sanctified for ever_] Compare vii. 16.\n\n \u2079For if ye turn again unto the LORD, your brethren and your\n children shall find compassion before them that led them captive,\n and shall come again into this land: for the LORD your God is\n gracious and merciful, and will not turn away his face from you,\n if ye return unto him. \u00b9\u2070So the posts passed from city to city\n through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, even unto Zebulun:\n but they laughed them to scorn, and mocked them.\n\n=9.= _shall find compassion_] Compare Psalms cvi. 46 (a similar phrase\nin Hebrew).\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Nevertheless divers of Asher and Manasseh and of Zebulun\n humbled themselves, and came to Jerusalem.\n\n=11.= _of Asher_] _Asher_ is somewhat strange. The parallel with\nverse 10 alone suggests that we should read =of Ephraim=; and this\nis the more probable if the real significance of the reference is\nfor the Chronicler\u2019s period (see the head-note, and xv. 9). It is not\nlikely that Judaism at that time could claim many adherents in the old\nterritory of Asher (see H\u00f6lscher, _Pal\u00e4stina_, p. 32).\n\n_humbled themselves_] So xxxiii. 12.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Also in Judah was the hand of God to give them one heart, to\n do the commandment of the king and of the princes by the word of\n the LORD.\n\n=12.= _Also in Judah was the hand of God_] i.e. the mighty working of\nGod, which brought some penitents from far parts of Israel, manifested\nitself in Judah also.\n\n_the commandment of the king ... by the word of the LORD_] The king\u2019s\ncommand was according to God\u2019s command in the Law.\n\n\n =13\u201227= (not in 2 Kings).\n HEZEKIAH\u2019S GREAT PASSOVER.\n\nIt seems clear that the story of Hezekiah\u2019s Passover has been composed\nby the Chronicler on the analogy of Josiah\u2019s grand celebration of that\nfeast (see xxxv. 1\u201219), which the present festival even surpasses in\nsome respects\u2015\u2015viz. in its scope (for all Israel and strangers, whereas\nJosiah\u2019s was for Judeans only) and in its duration (for two weeks,\nJosiah\u2019s for one). Josiah\u2019s Passover was famous because of the account\nof it in Kings. Doubtless the Chronicler felt that a celebration of\nthat feast was incumbent upon a great reforming monarch, and he has\ntherefore credited Hezekiah with observing it.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And there assembled at Jerusalem much people to keep the\n feast of unleavened bread in the second month, a very great\n congregation.\n\n=13.= _the feast of unleavened bread_] In the \u201cPassover\u201d were united\ntwo separate \u201cfeasts,\u201d (1)\u00a0the eating of the lamb on the fourteenth of\nNisan, (2)\u00a0the eating of unleavened bread from the fourteenth to the\ntwenty-first of Nisan. The combined Feast was sometimes called \u201cthe\nPassover\u201d and sometimes (as here) \u201cthe feast of unleavened bread\u201d;\ncompare Exodus xii. 1\u201214 and 17\u201220, and note that the intervening\nverses, 15, 16, bind the two feasts into one celebration.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And they arose and took away the altars that were in Jerusalem,\n and all the altars for incense\u00b9 took they away, and cast them\n into the brook Kidron.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _vessels_.\n\n=14.= _the altars_] Compare xxviii. 24.\n\n \u00b9\u2075Then they killed the passover on the fourteenth _day_ of the\n second month: and the priests and the Levites were ashamed,\n and sanctified themselves, and brought burnt offerings into the\n house of the LORD. \u00b9\u2076And they stood in their place after their\n order, according to the law of Moses the man of God: the priests\n sprinkled the blood, _which they received_ of the hand of the\n Levites.\n\n=15.= _the second month_] Compare verses 2, 3.\n\n_were ashamed_] Of their former backwardness; compare verse 3, xxix. 34.\n\n \u00b9\u2077For there were many in the congregation that had not\n sanctified themselves: therefore the Levites had the charge of\n killing the passovers for every one that was not clean, to\n sanctify them unto the LORD.\n\n=17.= _of killing the passovers_] \u201cPassovers\u201d (plural rare) = \u201cPaschal\nvictims\u201d; compare verse 15, xxxv. 8 (\u201cpassover offerings\u201d).\n\n \u00b9\u2078For a multitude of the people, even many of Ephraim and\n Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves,\n yet did they eat the passover otherwise than it is written. For\n Hezekiah had prayed for them, saying, The good LORD pardon every\n one\u00b9\n\n \u00b9 Or, _him that setteth his whole heart_.\n\n=18.= _of Ephraim_, etc.] The list of tribes given here does not\nagree with the list in verse 11, but in both cases it may be that the\nChronicler merely wished by his list to designate _men of the Northern\nKingdom_ as opposed to those of the Southern. He could not make the\ndistinction by using the term \u201cIsrael\u201d here, for in Chronicles \u201cIsrael\u201d\nas a rule is _not_ used in opposition to \u201cJudah\u201d; compare xi. 3 (note).\n(For a somewhat different view, see the head-note on verses 1\u201212 and\nxv. 9.)\n\n_otherwise than it is written_] i.e. they were allowed to partake of\nthe Passover meal, although not purified according to the regulations\nof the Law.\n\n \u00b9\u2079that setteth his heart to seek God, the LORD, the God of\n his fathers, though _he be_ not _cleansed_ according to the\n purification of the sanctuary.\n\n=18, 19.= _The good LORD pardon every one that_, etc.] In Hebrew verse\n18 ends abruptly with the word \u201cpardon.\u201d Probably the Revised Version\nis correct in disregarding the Hebrew division. The phrase \u201cthe good\nLORD\u201d is not found elsewhere, and another suggestion is to transpose\nthe adjective and read (verse 18) ... \u201c=The LORD pardon the good=:\n(verse 19) =even every one that=,\u201d etc. The LXX., however, supports the\norder of the Hebrew text.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And the LORD hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people.\n\n=20.= _healed the people_] By _prevention_; no plague was allowed to\nbreak out among them, although uncleanness in the sanctuary had been\nthreatened with death; Leviticus xv. 31.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And the children of Israel that were present at Jerusalem kept\n the feast of unleavened bread seven days with great gladness:\n and the Levites and the priests praised the LORD day by day,\n _singing_ with loud instruments unto the LORD.\n\n=21.= _with loud instruments_] Literally \u201cwith instruments of strength.\u201d\nIt is better to read \u201cwith all their might\u201d (as 1 Chronicles xiii. 8).\nThe change in Hebrew amounts only to the dropping of the smallest\nletter (_y\u014dd_).\n\n \u00b2\u00b2And Hezekiah spake comfortably unto all the Levites that\n were well skilled _in the service_ of the LORD. So they did eat\n throughout the feast for the seven days, offering sacrifices of\n peace offerings, and making confession\u00b9 to the LORD, the God of\n their fathers.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _giving thanks_.\n\n=22.= _spake comfortably_] i.e. with kindly and appreciative words. For\nthe phrase compare Isaiah xl. 2.\n\n_making confession_] Or, as margin, \u201cgiving thanks.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And the whole congregation took counsel to keep other seven\n days: and they kept _other_ seven days with gladness.\n\n=23.= other _seven days_] Compare vii. 9 (Solomon\u2019s Dedication Feast).\n\n \u00b2\u2074For Hezekiah king of Judah did give to the congregation\n for offerings a thousand bullocks and seven thousand sheep; and\n the princes gave to the congregation a thousand bullocks and\n ten thousand sheep: and a great number of priests sanctified\n themselves.\n\n=24.= _sanctified themselves_] Compare xxix. 34.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And all the congregation of Judah, with the priests and the\n Levites, and all the congregation that came out of Israel, and\n the strangers that came out of the land of Israel, and that\n dwelt in Judah, rejoiced.\n\n=25.= _the strangers_] i.e. men of alien descent dwelling in Israel\nwith certain conceded, not inherited, rights, and with most of the\nobligations of the native Israelite. LXX. \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 Compare ii. 17;\n1 Chronicles xxii. 2 for the unfavourable side of a \u201cstranger\u2019s\u201d\nposition.\n\n \u00b2\u2076So there was great joy in Jerusalem: for since the time of\n Solomon the son of David king of Israel there was not the like\n in Jerusalem.\n\n=26.= _since the time of Solomon_] For Solomon\u2019s great festival, see\nv. 2 ff.\n\n_there was not the like_] Compare what is said of Josiah\u2019s Passover;\nxxxv. 18 (note).\n\n \u00b2\u2077Then the priests the Levites arose and blessed the people:\n and their voice was heard, and their prayer came up to his holy\n habitation, even unto heaven.\n\n=27.= _the priests the Levites_] So in xxiii. 18, but only in these\ntwo places in Chronicles The phrase is Deuteronomic, and implies that\nat the stage of ritual development represented in Deuteronomy _all_\nLevites were potentially priests. Such was not in any case the view\nof the Chronicler, and perhaps we ought to read \u201cthe priests and the\nLevites\u201d both here and in xxiii. 18.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXI.\n\n\n =1= (compare 2 Kings xviii. 4).\n DESTRUCTION OF IDOLATROUS SYMBOLS.\n\n \u00b9Now when all this was finished, all Israel that were present\n went out to the cities of Judah, and brake in pieces the\n pillars\u00b9, and hewed down the Asherim, and brake down the high\n places and the altars out of all Judah and Benjamin, in Ephraim\n also and Manasseh, until they had destroyed them all. Then all\n the children of Israel returned, every man to his possession,\n into their own cities.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _obelisks_.\n\n=1.= _the pillars ... the Asherim_] Compare xiv. 3 (note).\n\n_in Ephraim also_] It is obviously assumed that the Northern Kingdom\nhad come to an end; compare xxx. 6, 9.\n\n\n =2\u201221= (not in 2 Kings).\n ORGANISATION OF THE PRIESTS. TITHE.\n\nIf the Temple had been desecrated and closed by Ahaz, it would follow\nthat the organisation of its Priests and Levites had fallen into\nconfusion. The Chronicler therefore makes Hezekiah the restorer of the\nsystem inaugurated by David, and treats this edifying topic at some\nlength.\n\n \u00b2And Hezekiah appointed the courses of the priests and the\n Levites after their courses, every man according to his service,\n both the priests and the Levites, for burnt offerings and for\n peace offerings, to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise\n in the gates of the camp of the LORD.\n\n=2.= _the courses_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv. 1 ff.\n\n_to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise in the gates_]\nBetter, as LXX., altering the order, _to give thanks and to praise\nand to minister in the gates_. \u201cTo minister in the gates,\u201d i.e. to be\ndoorkeepers, compare 1 Chronicles xxvi. 1.\n\n_the camp of the LORD_] i.e. (in the language of Deuteronomy) \u201cthe\nplace which the Lord chose,\u201d _Jerusalem_ or, more exactly, the _Temple\narea_. Compare 1 Chronicles ix. 18, note.\n\n \u00b3_He appointed_ also the king\u2019s portion of his substance for\n the burnt offerings, _to wit_, for the morning and evening burnt\n offerings, and the burnt offerings for the sabbaths, and for the\n new moons, and for the set feasts, as it is written in the law\n of the LORD. \u2074Moreover he commanded the people that dwelt in\n Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests and the Levites,\n that they might give themselves\u00b9 to the law of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _be strong in_.\n\n=3.= _the burnt offerings_] Compare viii. 12, 13.\n\n \u2075And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the children of\n Israel gave in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil,\n and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the tithe\n of all things brought they in abundantly.\n\n=5.= _and honey_] _Honey_ (Hebrew _d\u0115bhash_) is not elsewhere mentioned\nas subject to tithe; perhaps _grape syrup_ (modern Arabic _dibs_) is\nmeant here, as in Genesis xliii. 11 and Ezekiel xxvii. 17 (according to\nsome commentators). Honey (like leaven) was forbidden for sacrificial\nuse (Leviticus ii. 11).\n\n \u2076And the children of Israel and Judah, that dwelt in the cities\n of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and\n the tithe of dedicated things which were consecrated unto the\n LORD their God, and laid them by heaps.\n\n=6.= _And the children of Israel_] Compare xi. 16.\n\n_the tithe of dedicated things_] a strange phrase without parallel.\nRead probably =the dedicated things=.\n\n \u2077In the third month they began to lay the foundation of the\n heaps, and finished them in the seventh month. \u2078And when\n Hezekiah and the princes came and saw the heaps, they blessed\n the LORD, and his people Israel. \u2079Then Hezekiah questioned with\n the priests and the Levites concerning the heaps.\n\n=7.= _the third month_] The Feast of Harvest took place at the\nbeginning of this month and seven weeks later the Feast of Ingathering\nfollowed.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And Azariah the chief priest, of the house of Zadok, answered\n him and said, Since _the people_ began to bring the oblations\n into the house of the LORD, we have eaten and had enough, and\n have left plenty: for the LORD hath blessed his people; and that\n which is left is this great store.\n\n=10.= _Azariah the chief priest_] Not mentioned in connection with\nHezekiah\u2019s previous arrangements.\n\n_of the house of Zadok_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiv. 1\u20124. Tradition\nspoke of _two_ main families of priests, (1)\u00a0the descendants of Eleazar\nthe third son of Aaron, whose chief representative in David\u2019s day\nwas Zadok (hence they are here called \u201cthe house of Zadok\u201d), (2)\u00a0the\ndescendants of Ithamar the fourth son of Aaron, represented in David\u2019s\ntime by Ahimelech (Saul\u2019s victim) or by Abiathar (David\u2019s _prot\u00e9g\u00e9_).\nThe Chronicler prefers to name the descendants of Ithamar after\nAhimelech (1 Chronicles xxiv. 3, where see note).\n\n_the oblations_] \u201cThe Hebrew word, _t\u0115r\u016bm\u0101h_, denotes properly what\nis \u2018taken off\u2019 from a larger mass and so separated from it for sacred\npurposes.\u201d The word is sometimes rendered _heave offering_, but this is\ndue to a mistaken impression that a rite of elevation was involved (see\nthe full note in Driver, _Exodus_, p. 263).\n\n_hath blessed his people_] Compare Malachi iii. 10.\n\n_and that which is left is this great store_] The Hebrew requires some\ncorrection. Read as the LXX., \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u201cwe\nleave (\u2018have left\u2019) this great store and more.\u201d\n\n=11\u201213.= The offerings mentioned in verses 5\u201210 were placed in charge\nof Conaniah, Shimei and their subordinates for storage in the Temple\ntreasuries.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Then Hezekiah commanded to prepare chambers in the house of\n the LORD; and they prepared them.\n\n=11.= _chambers_] compare 1 Chronicles ix. 26, note.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And they brought in the oblations and the tithes and the\n dedicated things faithfully: and over them Conaniah the Levite\n was ruler, and Shimei his brother was second.\n\n=12.= _the dedicated things_] Compare xxix. 33 (note on _the\nconsecrated things_).\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And Jehiel, and Azaziah, and Nahath, and Asahel, and Jerimoth,\n and Jozabad, and Eliel, and Ismachiah, and Mahath, and Benaiah,\n were overseers under the hand of Conaniah and Shimei his brother,\n by the appointment of Hezekiah the king, and Azariah the ruler\n of the house of God.\n\n=13.= _the ruler of the house of God_] Compare 1 Chronicles ix. 11,\nnote.\n\n=14\u201219.= Distribution of the stores referred to in verses 11\u201213 was\nthe duty of Kore and his subordinates. The exact meaning and sequence\nof these verses is hard to follow, and probably the obscurity is due\nto faults in the Hebrew text. The simplest view is as follows: verse 15\nstates that the distribution was to be made to priestly and levitical\npersons resident in the priestly cities but (verse 16) _not_ to those\nwho were for the time being on duty at the Temple, since these no\ndoubt would receive their share at the Temple itself. Then verses\n17\u201219 seem to refer to the manner of the registration of priests and\nLevites respectively for the purpose of the distribution; but it must\nbe confessed that the precise sense and connection are uncertain,\nparticularly as regards verse 19.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And Kore the son of Imnah the Levite, the porter at the east\n _gate_, was over the freewill offerings of God, to distribute\n the oblations of the LORD, and the most holy things.\n\n=14.= _the most holy things_] To this class belonged the _shewbread_\n(Leviticus xxiv. 9), the _meal offering_ (Leviticus ii. 2, 3, vi. 14\u201218\n[7\u201211, Hebrew]), the _sin offering_ (Leviticus vi. 25\u201230), and the\n_trespass offering_ (Leviticus vii. 1\u20127). These could be eaten by the\npriests only and in the holy place only.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And under him were Eden, and Miniamin, and Jeshua, and\n Shemaiah, Amariah, and Shecaniah, in the cities of the priests,\n in their set office\u00b9, to give to their brethren by courses, as\n well to the great as to the small:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _trust_.\n\n=15.= _in the cities_] The priestly cities are given 1 Chronicles vi.\n54\u201260.\n\n_to the great as to the small_] i.e. to old and to young alike.\n\n \u00b9\u2076beside them that were reckoned by genealogy of males, from\n three years old and upward, even every one that entered into the\n house of the LORD, as the duty of every day required\u00b9, for their\n service in their charges according to their courses;\n\n \u00b9 Or, _for his daily portion_.\n\n=16.= _beside_] i.e. with the exception of.\n\n_as the duty of every day required_] Or, as margin, =for his daily\nportion=.\n\n \u00b9\u2077and them that were reckoned by genealogy of the priests by\n their fathers\u2019 houses, and the Levites from twenty years old and\n upward, in their charges by their courses;\n\n=17.= _and them that_] Render probably =and as for the registration of\nthe priests= _it was made_ =by their families=....\n\n \u00b9\u2078and them\u00b9 that were reckoned by genealogy of all their little\n ones, their wives, and their sons, and their daughters, through\n all the congregation: for in their set office\u00b2 they sanctified\n themselves in holiness:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _even_ to give _to them_ &c.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _trust_.\n\n=18.= _and them that_] Render, =and the registration included all their\nlittle ones=, etc. The connection of the last part of the verse is very\nobscure.\n\n_their set office_] Or, as margin, =their trust= (so also above verse\n15).\n\n_they sanctified themselves in holiness_] Or, _they busied themselves\nwith_ the distribution of _the sanctified things_. No reliance can be\nplaced on the soundness of the text.\n\n \u00b9\u2079also for the sons of Aaron the priests, which were in the\n fields of the suburbs of their cities, in every several city,\n there were men that were expressed by name, to give portions\n to all the males among the priests, and to all that were\n reckoned by genealogy among the Levites. \u00b2\u2070And thus did Hezekiah\n throughout all Judah; and he wrought that which was good and\n right and faithful\u00b9 before the LORD his God. \u00b2\u00b9And in every work\n that he began in the service of the house of God, and in the law,\n and in the commandments, to seek his God, he did it with all his\n heart, and prospered.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _faithfulness_.\n\n=19.= Again a most obscure verse, apparently meaning that the priests\nhad certain special officers, other than Kore and his subordinates,\nwho were charged with superintending the distribution in the outlying\ndistricts. Text and interpretation are alike uncertain. Kittel regards\nverses 17\u201219 as a late addition.\n\n_the suburbs_] compare 1 Chronicles v. 16 (margin \u201cpasture lands\u201d),\nvi. 55, 57 [40, 42, Hebrew].\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXII.\n\n\n =1\u20128= (compare 2 Kings xviii. 13\u201216).\n SENNACHERIB\u2019S THREATENED INVASION. HEZEKIAH\u2019S PRECAUTIONS.\n\nThe Chronicler introduces us somewhat abruptly to the Assyrian crisis.\nFrom 2 Kings we learn that Hezekiah renounced the suzerainty of Assyria\n(xviii. 7), which his father Ahaz had acknowledged (2 Kings xvi. 7).\nThereupon Sennacherib invaded Judah, and Hezekiah was obliged to\nacknowledge with a heavy payment of tribute his dependence on the\nAssyrian king (2 Kings xviii. 13\u201216). Sennacherib having discovered the\nweakness of Judah, next demanded an unconditional surrender, intending\nto transport the Jews to another country (2 Kings xviii. 31, 32).\nThis demand Hezekiah resisted, being strengthened thereto by Isaiah.\nThe Chronicler does not refer to the earlier invasion or to the\ntribute\u2015\u2015such a humiliation of the pious and devoted king being in\nhis belief unthinkable. That any invasion should have taken place\n\u201cafter these things and this faithfulness\u201d was sufficiently astonishing,\nuntil the issue showed that the anxiety and distress were only for the\ngreater glory of Israel\u2019s God and for the further proof of Hezekiah\u2019s\ntrust in Him.\n\n \u00b9After these things, and this faithfulness, Sennacherib king\n of Assyria came, and entered into Judah, and encamped against\n the fenced cities, and thought to win them\u00b9 for himself. \u00b2And\n when Hezekiah saw that Sennacherib was come, and that he was\n purposed\u00b2 to fight against Jerusalem,\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _to break them up_.\n\n \u00b2 Hebrew _his face was to fight_.\n\n=1.= _After these things, and this faithfulness_] The phrase is a\n_hendiadys_ and stands for, \u201cAfter these faithful dealings.\u201d\n\n_Sennacherib_] This king (_San\u1e25\u0113rib_ in Hebrew, _Sin-a\u1e25i-irib_\n[_-irba_] in Assyrian, the \u03a3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 of Herod. II. 141) reigned\n705\u2012681 B.C. He was the son of Sargon (Isaiah xx. 1), father of\nEsar-haddon (2 Kings xix. 37; Ezra iv. 3), and grandfather of\nAsshur-bani-pal, the well-known \u03a3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 of Herod. II. 150, who\nis commonly identified with Osnappar (compare Ezra iv. 10). Under this\ndynasty Assyria reached the height of its power. The empire included\nBabylonia (which, however, was frequently in revolt), Assyria proper,\nSyria as far north as Cilicia (inclusive), and (under Esar-haddon and\nAsshur-bani-pal) Egypt. After Asshur-bani-pal\u2019s death (about 626 B.C.)\nthe Assyrian power was speedily destroyed. The form _Sennacherib_ is\nderived from the LXX. through the Vulgate.\n\n_to win them_] Literally _to make breaches in them_. According to\n2 Kings xviii. 13 Sennacherib took these cites; and the Assyrian\naccount on the \u201cPrism Inscription\u201d of Sennacherib which is preserved\nin the British Museum states that they were forty-six in number\n(compare Driver in Hogarth, _Authority and Archaeology_, pp. 104\u2012107;\nor Handcock, _Latest Light on Bible Lands_, pp. 153 ff.).\n\n \u00b3he took counsel with his princes and his mighty men to stop the\n waters of the fountains which were without the city; and they\n helped him.\n\n=3.= _to stop the waters_] Compare 2 Kings xx. 20 \u201c[Hezekiah] made the\npool and the conduit and brought water into the city,\u201d and Isaiah xxii.\n9, 11.\n\nAt the present day there is an underground tunnel cut through the rock\nleading from St Mary\u2019s Well down to the Lower Pool of Siloam (B\u00e4deker,\n_Palestine_\u2075, pp. 25, 83). It is rudely constructed and owing to its\nwindings is 586 yards long, though the distance in a straight line is\nonly 368 yards. As therefore the Lower Pool was probably within the\nancient walls, while St Mary\u2019s Well was outside, this tunnel may be\nHezekiah\u2019s conduit. If the well were stopped, the besiegers would lose\nthe water, which would collect in the Pool for the use of the besieged.\nAn inscription in ancient Hebrew characters (\u201cThe Siloam Inscription\u201d)\ndiscovered _in situ_ describes briefly the digging of the tunnel,\nbut does not enable us to fix the date of it with certainty. For the\noriginal text and an English translation see G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Jerusalem_,\nI. 95 f., or Driver, _Notes on Hebrew Text of Samuel_, viii. ff.\n\n \u2074So there was gathered much people together, and they stopped\n all the fountains, and the brook that flowed through the midst\n of the land, saying, Why should the kings of Assyria come, and\n find much water?\n\n=4.= _the brook that flowed_] The Hebrew verb means \u201cflow with strong\nstream\u201d (as a flood). We naturally look for such a brook either east\nof Jerusalem in the valley of Kidron or south in the valley of the son\nof Hinnom, but no perennial stream runs in either valley now. Possibly\n(owing to physical changes in the configuration of the country)\nthe waters which fed such a brook in the Chronicler\u2019s day now lose\nthemselves in the soil.\n\n \u2075And he took courage, and built up all the wall that was broken\n down, and raised _it_ up to the towers\u00b9, and the other\u00b2 wall\n without, and strengthened Millo _in_ the city of David, and made\n weapons and shields in abundance.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _heightened the towers_ Or, _went up upon the towers_ The\n Vulgate has, _built towers thereon_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _another_.\n\n=5.= _broken dozen_] Compare xxv. 23 (note).\n\n_raised_ it _up to the towers_] Hebrew _vayya\u2018al \u2018al_. Read =and he\nheightened the towers=, i.e. omitting the second _\u2019al_ as a dittography.\n\n_the other wall_] In Isaiah xxii. 9\u201211 the preparations to meet the\nAssyrian attack are described by the prophet who speaks of a \u201cditch\u201d\n(Revised Version \u201creservoir\u201d) made at this time between \u201cthe two\nwalls.\u201d In _Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894\u20121897_, Dr Bliss describes a\nbuttressed wall (pp. 96 ff.) built without lime (see his frontispiece\nfor an illustration of it) and enclosing the pool of Siloam on the\nsouth-east, which, he says, \u201cmay date back as far as Hezekiah\u201d (pp.\n325 f.). Dr Bliss also, following up a clue given by earlier explorers,\nfound a second wall (running at an angle to the first) enclosing the\npool on the west. This second wall was probably due to Herod, but Dr\nBliss suggests that the line it follows may have been defended by a\nwall as early as Hezekiah\u2019s day (p. 326). For further discussion see\nG.\u00a0A. Smith, _Jerusalem_, I. 182, 207.\n\n_Millo_] compare 1 Chronicles xi. 8, note.\n\n_weapons and shields_] Properly, _darts and shields_. These were meant,\nnot for such trained soldiers as Hezekiah could collect, but for the\nlevy _en masse_ with which the king proposed to man the walls. A dart\nto throw and a shield to protect the thrower as he threw were all that\nthe citizen-soldier needed. The Hebrew word (_shela\u1e25_) means \u201cdart,\nmissile\u201d; the more general rendering \u201cweapons\u201d obscures the precise\nnature of Hezekiah\u2019s preparations.\n\n \u2076And he set captains of war over the people, and gathered them\n together to him in the broad place at the gate of the city,\n and spake comfortably to them, saying, \u2077Be strong and of a good\n courage, be not afraid nor dismayed for the king of Assyria, nor\n for all the multitude that is with him: for there is a greater\u00b9\n with us than with him:\n\n \u00b9 Or, _there be more_.\n\n=6.= _in the broad place at the gate_] Compare xxix. 4; Nehemiah\nviii. 16. There is nothing here to show which of the two broad places\nmentioned in Nehemiah is meant, or whether some third place is intended.\n\n \u2078with him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the LORD our God\n to help us, and to fight our battles. And the people rested\n themselves upon the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.\n\n=8.= _an arm of flesh_] Compare Jeremiah xvii. 5. Contrast the frequent\nphrase \u201ca mighty hand and a stretched out arm\u201d (of Jehovah). An \u201carm\u201d\nis an ally or helper.\n\n_with us is the LORD_] Compare xv. 2, xx. 17; Isaiah viii. 10.\n\n\n =9\u201219= (compare 2 Kings xviii. 17\u201235).\n SENNACHERIB\u2019S THREATENING MESSAGES.\n\nIn this section Chronicles briefly and freely summarises 2 Kings.\n\n \u2079After this did Sennacherib king of Assyria send his servants\n to Jerusalem, (now he was before Lachish, and all his power with\n him,) unto Hezekiah king of Judah, and unto all Judah that were\n at Jerusalem, saying,\n\n=9.= _his servants_] Three of these are specified in 2 Kings by their\ntitles, viz. the Tartan (\u201cCommander-in-chief\u201d), the Rabsaris (perhaps\n\u201cChief of the Princes\u201d), and the Rabshakeh (\u201cChief of the officers _or_\ncup-bearers\u201d).\n\n_now he was before Lachish_] The capture of Lachish by Sennacherib\nand its spoliation are shown on an Assyrian relief now in the British\nMuseum. The king himself besieged Lachish because it was of more\nimportance for the main object of the campaign than Jerusalem.\nSennacherib\u2019s objective was Egypt (Herodotus II. 141), and Lachish\n(_Tell el-\u1e24esi_, B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, p. 118) lay directly in his\npath (compare Handcock, _Latest Light on Bible Lands_, p. 151).\n\n \u00b9\u2070Thus saith Sennacherib king of Assyria, Whereon do ye trust,\n that ye abide the siege\u00b9 in Jerusalem?\n\n \u00b9 Or, _in the strong hold_.\n\n=10.= _in Jerusalem_] Isaiah promised deliverance in Jerusalem; e.g. in\nIsaiah xxix. 8, xxx. 19.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Doth not Hezekiah persuade you, to give you over to die by\n famine and by thirst, saying, The LORD our God shall deliver us\n out of the hand of the king of Assyria?\n\n=11.= _persuade_] Or \u201centice\u201d; compare 1 Chronicles xxi. 1 (\u201cprovoked\u201d\nfor the same Hebrew word).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2Hath not the same Hezekiah taken away his high places and\n his altars, and commanded Judah and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall\n worship before one altar, and upon it shall ye burn incense?\n\n=12.= _Hath not the same Hezekiah taken away_] Besides this appeal\nto the religious prejudices of the people, Sennacherib\u2019s servants\nemployed two other arguments, according to 2 Kings\u2015\u2015(1)\u00a0the paucity of\nHezekiah\u2019s soldiers (2 Kings xviii. 23) and (2)\u00a0possible reliance on\nEgyptian help (2 Kings xviii. 21, 25). These two arguments are passed\nover by the Chronicler doubtless because they seemed inconsistent both\nwith the power and the character of a king so God-fearing as Hezekiah.\n\n_his high places_] compare 2 Kings xviii. 4. The \u201chigh places\u201d\n(_b\u0101m\u014dth_) were properly sanctuaries of Jehovah, and not necessarily\nidolatrous in themselves. But since originally all, or almost all,\nof these _b\u0101m\u014dth_ had been sacred places of the Canaanite gods, old\nidolatrous symbols (e.g. the _ash\u0113rah_) and old idolatrous ideas and\nrites persisted in the worship there offered. When finally the Jews\nrestricted sacrificial worship to Jerusalem, the _odium_ attaching to\nthese \u201chigh places\u201d became greater than ever, and hostility towards\nthem came to be regarded as the mark of any pious monarch. Hezekiah\nremoved the _b\u0101m\u014dth_ throughout the country.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3Know ye not what I and my fathers have done unto all the\n peoples of the lands? Were the gods of the nations of the lands\n any ways able to deliver their land out of mine hand? \u00b9\u2074Who\n was there among all the gods of those nations which my fathers\n utterly destroyed\u00b9, that could deliver his people out of mine\n hand, that your God should be able to deliver you out of mine\n hand? \u00b9\u2075Now therefore let not Hezekiah deceive you, nor persuade\n you on this manner, neither believe ye him: for no god of any\n nation or kingdom was able to deliver his people out of mine\n hand, and out of the hand of my fathers: how much less shall\n your God\u00b2 deliver you out of mine hand? \u00b9\u2076And his servants spake\n yet more against the LORD God, and against his servant Hezekiah.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _devoted_.\n\n \u00b2 Or, _gods_.\n\n=13.= _the peoples of the lands_] In 2 Kings xviii. 34 the lands are\nspecified and include _Samaria_.\n\n \u00b9\u2077He wrote also letters\u00b9, to rail on the LORD, the God of Israel,\n and to speak against him, saying, As the gods of the nations\n of the lands, which have not delivered their people out of mine\n hand, so shall not the God of Hezekiah deliver his people out of\n mine hand.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _a letter_.\n\n=17.= _to rail on_] Or, _to defy_ (the same Hebrew word as in 2 Kings\nxix. 4, 16, 22, 33, and there rendered \u201creproach\u201d).\n\n \u00b9\u2078And they cried with a loud voice in the Jews\u2019 language unto\n the people of Jerusalem that were on the wall, to affright them,\n and to trouble them; that they might take the city.\n\n=18.= _in the Jews\u2019 language_] i.e. in Hebrew. From the parallel\npassage, 2 Kings xviii. 26 ff., it is evident that the language of\ndiplomacy at this time in Western Asia was Aramaic (\u201cSyrian,\u201d 2 Kings);\nand that, whilst understood by the Jewish leaders and officials, it\nwas not yet intelligible to the common people. In the negotiations the\nRabshakeh showed clearly that his object was not to treat with Hezekiah,\nbut to excite a revolt among the Jews against Hezekiah and so gain\npossession of the city.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And they spake of the God of Jerusalem, as of the gods of the\n peoples of the earth, which are the work of men\u2019s hands.\n\n=19.= _the God of Jerusalem_] For this designation compare Psalms\ncxxxv. 21.\n\n\n =20\u201223= (compare 2 Kings xix. 1\u20124, 14\u201219, 35\u201237).\n HEZEKIAH AND ISAIAH PRAY. THE DELIVERANCE.\n\nThis section is a very brief summary of 2 Kings xix.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And Hezekiah the king, and Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz,\n prayed because of this, and cried to heaven.\n\n=20.= _And Hezekiah ... and Isaiah ... prayed_] According to Kings,\nHezekiah prayed, and was answered by God through the medium of a\nmessage delivered by Isaiah the prophet (2 Kings xix. 20\u201234).\n\n_heaven_] Here used reverently for \u201cGod\u201d; compare xxviii. 9; Daniel\niv. 26; Luke xv. 21.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9And the LORD sent an angel, which cut off all the mighty men\n of valour, and the leaders and captains, in the camp of the king\n of Assyria. So he returned with shame of face to his own land.\n And when he was come into the house of his god, they that came\n forth of his own bowels slew him\u00b9 there with the sword.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _caused him to fall_.\n\n=21.= _all the mighty men_] In number 185,000 according to 2 Kings xix.\n35 and Isaiah xxxvii. 36. The agency was probably the plague, which is\npictured as a destroying angel in 2 Samuel xxiv. 16.\n\n_And when he was come_] The murder of Sennacherib did not occur till\nsome 20 years after his Judean expedition (_circa_ 701 B.C.), i.e. not\ntill 681 B.C.\n\n_they that came forth_] The Chronicler no doubt follows Isaiah xxxvii.\n38, \u201cAdrammelech and Sharezer _his sons_ smote him\u201d; but the accuracy\nof the present text of this passage of Isaiah is doubtful, for in the\nparallel passage (2 Kings xix. 37, _Keth\u012bb_) the words _his sons_ are\nmissing. The only notice of Sennacherib\u2019s death known to us at present\nfrom the inscriptions reads \u201cSennacherib king of Assyria was slain by\nhis son (singular) in a revolt.\u201d No name is given to this son. (Driver\nin Hogarth, _Authority and Archaeology_, p. 109.)\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Thus the LORD saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem\n from the hand of Sennacherib the king of Assyria, and from the\n hand of all _other_, and guided them on every side.\n\n=22.= _guided them on every side_] Read, as the LXX., =gave them rest\non every side=; compare xx. 30.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And many brought gifts unto the LORD to Jerusalem, and\n precious things to Hezekiah king of Judah: so that he was\n exalted in the sight of all nations from thenceforth.\n\n=23.= _brought gifts_] Compare Psalms lxviii. 29; Isaiah xviii. 7;\nHaggai ii. 7, 8.\n\n\n =24\u201233= (compare 2 Kings xx.; Isaiah xxxviii., xxxix.).\n HEZEKIAH\u2019S SICKNESS. THE AMBASSADORS FROM BABYLON.\n HEZEKIAH\u2019S DEATH.\n\n \u00b2\u2074In those days Hezekiah was sick even unto death: and he\n prayed unto the LORD; and he spake unto him, and gave him a\n sign\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _wonder_.\n\n=24.= Remark that this single verse epitomises 2 Kings xx. 1\u201211.\n\n_In those days_] The phrase is taken over from 2 Kings xx. 1, and it\ncannot be determined what date is intended, though we may conclude\nfrom 2 Kings xx. 6 that it was a time at which the Assyrian danger was\nnot yet past, and that it was about the fourteenth year of Hezekiah\n(compare Barnes on 2 Kings xx. 1).\n\n_he spake_] The Hebrew word means, in certain connections, \u201cto promise,\u201d\nand the idea of \u201cpromise\u201d is present here, the sense being \u201cGod made\nhim a promise and confirmed it by a wonder\u201d; compare 2 Kings xx. 5, 6,\n8\u201211.\n\n_a sign_] Rather, =a wonder= (margin), as in verse 31.\n\n \u00b2\u2075But Hezekiah rendered not again according to the benefit done\n unto him; for his heart was lifted up: therefore there was wrath\n upon him, and upon Judah and Jerusalem.\n\n=25.= _his heart was lifted up_] Compare verse 31; 2 Kings xx. 12\u201215.\n\n_wrath_] Hebrew _\u1e33e\u1e63eph_, a visitation of Divine wrath; compare xix.\n2, 10, xxiv. 18, xxix. 8.\n\n \u00b2\u2076Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride\u00b9 of\n his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the\n wrath of the LORD came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _the lifting up_.\n\n=26.= _humbled himself_] Compare 2 Kings xx. 19.\n\n \u00b2\u2077And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honour: and he\n provided him treasuries for silver, and for gold, and for\n precious stones, and for spices, and for shields, and for all\n manner of goodly vessels;\n\n=27.= _riches and honour_] Compare 2 Kings xx. 13 (= Isaiah xxxix. 2).\n\n_shields_] Hebrew _m\u0101ginn\u014dth_, i.e. small round shields. Perhaps, like\nSolomon\u2019s (ix. 15, 16), they were overlaid with gold or silver. Barnes\nsuggested the reading _migd\u0101n\u014dth_, \u201cprecious things\u201d (as in verse 23),\ninstead of _m\u0101ginn\u014dth_. LXX. \u1f41\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2, i.e. \u201carmouries\u201d; Peshit\u1e6da\n(text being doubtful here) \u201cshields\u201d _or_ \u201cpearls\u201d _or_ \u201cprecious\ngifts.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u2078storehouses also for the increase of corn and wine and oil;\n and stalls for all manner of beasts, and flocks in folds.\n\n=28.= _flocks in folds_] The \u201cfolds\u201d were enclosures with high stone\nwalls as a defence against robbers and wild beasts. The text is\nprobably faulty; Peshit\u1e6da omits the clause.\n\n \u00b2\u2079Moreover he provided him cities, and possessions of flocks and\n herds in abundance: for God had given him very much substance.\n\n=29.= _cities_] The context suggests that these cities were meant\nchiefly as places of refuge for the flocks and herds in time of war;\nbut again it is probable that the text is corrupt, and that this word\nshould be omitted.\n\n \u00b3\u2070This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper spring of the waters\n of Gihon, and brought them straight down on the west side of the\n city of David. And Hezekiah prospered in all his works.\n\n=30.= _stopped_] Compare verses 3, 4.\n\n_Gihon_] The upper spring of Gihon is represented to-day by _St Mary\u2019s\nWell_; compare B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_\u2075, pp. 25, 83, and note on verse\n3 above.\n\n_on the west side of the city_] Render, =westwards to the city=. The\ndirection followed by the tunnel through which Hezekiah brought the\nwaters from the upper spring of Gihon (St Mary\u2019s Well outside the city)\nto the Pool of Siloam within the walls is roughly west or south-west;\nsee G.\u00a0A. Smith, _Jerusalem_, 1. 102 f.\n\n \u00b3\u00b9Howbeit in _the business of_ the ambassadors\u00b9 of the princes\n of Babylon, who sent unto him to inquire of the wonder that was\n done in the land, God left him, to try him, that he might know\n all that was in his heart.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _interpreters_.\n\n=31.= _who sent_] Read rather, with LXX., _who had been sent_.\n\n_to inquire of the wonder_] According to 2 Kings xx. 12; Isaiah xxxix.\n1, the ostensible reason of the embassy was to congratulate Hezekiah\non his recovery. The real object was to gain over Judah to an alliance\nagainst Assyria, from which Babylon was constantly seeking to revolt.\n\n_to try him, that he might know_, etc.] The phrase is based on\nDeuteronomy viii. 2.\n\n \u00b3\u00b2Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his good deeds,\n behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet the\n son of Amoz, in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel.\n\n=32.= _his good deeds_] Compare xxxv. 26 (of Josiah); Nehemiah xiii. 14\n(of Nehemiah).\n\n_the vision of Isaiah ... in the book of the kings_] The reference is\napparently to Isaiah xxxvi. 2\u2012xxxix. 8 = 2 Kings xviii. 17\u2012xx. 21.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And Hezekiah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in\n the ascent of the sepulchres of the sons of David: and all Judah\n and the inhabitants of Jerusalem did him honour at his death.\n And Manasseh his son reigned in his stead.\n\n=33.= _in the ascent of the sepulchres of the sons of David_] What\nis implied by \u201cthe _ascent_ of the sepulchres,\u201d the phrase being\nfound only here? Some hold that it means a place outside the royal\nburying-ground, and that, since exclusion from the royal sepulchres\nwas a mark of dishonour otherwise confined to the bodies of wicked\nkings (xxi. 20, xxiv. 25, xxvi. 23, xxviii. 27) the statement could\nhardly emanate from the Chronicler himself but must be derived from\nsome old and presumably trustworthy source: an unsatisfactory view.\nCertainly the Chronicler cannot have understood the phrase to mean\nanything derogatory to Hezekiah, and there is, in fact, no necessity\nto interpret it as some place _outside_ the royal sepulchres. On the\ncontrary, it is reasonable to suppose that it means a definite part of\nthis royal cemetery, the lower slopes (\u201cascent\u201d) or possibly the higher\npart.\n\n_did him honour_] compare xvi. 14, xxi. 19.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXIII.\n\n\n =1\u201210= (compare 2 Kings xxi. 1\u201216).\n MANASSEH\u2019S REIGN. HIS APOSTASY.\n\n \u00b9Manasseh was twelve years old when he began to reign; and\n he reigned fifty and five years in Jerusalem. \u00b2And he did that\n which was evil in the sight of the LORD, after the abominations\n of the heathen, whom the LORD cast out before the children of\n Israel.\n\n=1.= _in Jerusalem_] The Chronicler omits here the name of Manasseh\u2019s\nmother, _Hephzi-bah_.\n\n \u00b3For he built again the high places which Hezekiah his father\n had broken down; and he reared up altars for the Baalim, and\n made Asheroth, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served\n them.\n\n=3.= _the Baalim_] i.e. the gods\u2015\u2015of Canaan\u2015\u2015_Baalim_ being the plural\nof the word _Baal_ (Lord, i.e. God). See the notes on xvii. 3, and\n1 Chronicles viii. 33.\n\n_Asheroth_] compare xiv. 3 (note).\n\n_the host of heaven_] See the note on xviii. 18. Compare 2 Kings\nxvii. 16; Jeremiah viii. 2.\n\n \u2074And he built altars in the house of the LORD, whereof the LORD\n said, In Jerusalem shall my name be for ever.\n\n=4.= _shall my name be for ever_] Compare vii. 16.\n\n \u2075And he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two\n courts of the house of the LORD.\n\n=5.= _the two courts_] Compare iv. 9 (note).\n\n \u2076He also made his children to pass through the fire in the\n valley of the son of Hinnom: and he practised augury, and used\n enchantments, and practised sorcery, and dealt with them that\n had familiar spirits, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in\n the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.\n\n=6.= _He also made_] In the Hebrew there is stress on the pronoun \u201cHe\u201d\n(that wicked one!).\n\n_to pass through the fire_] Compare xxviii. 3 (note).\n\n_in the valley of the son of Hinnom_] Compare Jeremiah vii. 31, 32.\n\n_practised augury_] The precise meaning of the Hebrew word (_\u2018\u014dn\u0113n_) is\nquite uncertain, so that we cannot be sure what form of divination is\nmeant. \u201cAugury\u201d among the Romans consisted chiefly in observing birds\nand interpreting the observations made, but auguries were also taken\nfrom other natural phenomena.\n\n_practised sorcery_] The Hebrew word (_kishsh\u0113ph_) probably means \u201cto\nmake a magic brew with shredded herbs.\u201d\n\n_with them that had familiar spirits_] The Hebrew word (_\u014db_) probably\nmeans a necromancer who used ventriloquism in the practice of his art.\nThe witch of Endor (1 Samuel xxviii.) was such a person. LXX. here has\n[\u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd] \u1f10\u03bd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, i.e. \u201che appointed ventriloquists.\u201d\n\n \u2077And he set the graven image of the idol, which he had made, in\n the house of God, of which God said to David and to Solomon his\n son, In this house, and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of\n all the tribes of Israel, will I put my name for ever: \u2078neither\n will I any more remove the foot of Israel from off the land\n which I have appointed for your fathers; if only they will\n observe to do all that I have commanded them, even all the law\n and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.\n\n=7.= _the graven image of the idol_] In 2 Kings xxi. 7, Revised Version\n\u201cthe graven image of Asherah.\u201d For Asherah compare xv. 16 (note).\n\n \u2079And Manasseh made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to err,\n so that they did evil more than did the nations, whom the LORD\n destroyed before the children of Israel.\n\n=9.= _And Manasseh made Judah_, etc.] Compare Jeremiah xv. 4, where the\ncaptivity itself is referred back for its cause to the evil deeds of\nManasseh.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And the LORD spake to Manasseh, and to his people: but they\n gave no heed.\n\n=10.= _the LORD spake_] i.e. by prophets; compare 2 Kings xxi. 10\u201215.\n\n\n =11\u201213= (not in 2 Kings).\n THE PUNISHMENT OF MANASSEH, AND HIS REPENTANCE.\n\nIt has been urged that the tradition of Manasseh\u2019s captivity in\nBabylon, his restoration to the throne of Judah, and his attempt at\nreformation\u2015\u2015events related only by the Chronicler\u2015\u2015ought not to be\nregarded as historically true, but are simply inventions put forward\nas a possible explanation of the (to the Chronicler) strange fact\nthat the wicked king Manasseh reigned for no less than fifty and five\nyears. The objections to the tradition are not slight\u2015\u2015in view of the\ngeneral character of the Chronicler\u2019s work. In particular, the story\nof Manasseh\u2019s penitence might easily be an assumption to justify the\nfact of his long reign, and it is very difficult to correlate it with\nJeremiah xv. 4, where the captivity of the nation is expressly declared\nto be due to Manasseh\u2019s wickedness. The evidence is not decisive,\nhowever; and a brief and perhaps half-hearted repentance towards the\nclose of his reign might well be forgotten or deemed negligible. The\nevidence against the historicity of the tradition of the _captivity_ of\nManasseh is much less strong, being chiefly the silence of Kings. The\nfacts mentioned in the following note indicate that there is nothing\ninherently improbable in the tradition, and it is therefore legitimate\nto accept it as very possibly correct, although we are not yet able to\nconfirm it from the Assyrian records.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Wherefore the LORD brought upon them the captains of the host\n of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh in chains\u00b9, and\n bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon. \u00b9\u00b2And when\n he was in distress, he besought the LORD his God, and humbled\n himself greatly before the God of his fathers.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _with hooks_.\n\n=11.= _Assyria_] Manasseh is mentioned in an Assyrian list of\nkings tributary to Esar-haddon and Asshur-bani-pal, but no Assyrian\ninscription at present known speaks of his captivity. We have, however,\nmonumental evidence that there was a great insurrection against\nAsshur-bani-pal, the grandson of Sennacherib, in which Western Asia\n(and _perhaps_ Manasseh) was involved. The subsequent restoration of\nManasseh to his kingdom is not incredible, for Neco I of Egypt was\nfirst put in fetters and afterwards sent back to Egypt. (Driver in\nHogarth, _Authority and Archaeology_, pp. 114\u2012116.)\n\n_in chains_] Rather, =with hook= (as margin); compare 2 Kings xix. 28\n(= Isaiah xxxvii. 29). Assyrian kings sometimes thrust a hook or ring\ninto the nostrils of their captives and so led them about. The practice\nis illustrated on many Assyrian reliefs in the British Museum (see\nHandcock, _Latest Light on Bible Lands_, p. 159).\n\n_to Babylon_] _Nineveh_, not Babylon, was the capital of Assyria,\nbut as Asshur-bani-pal at times resided in Babylon, there is nothing\nimprobable in any important prisoner of his being carried thither.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And he prayed unto him; and he was intreated of him, and heard\n his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his\n kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD he was God.\n\n=13.= _he prayed unto him; and he was intreated of him_] It is very\npleasing to notice that, for all the rigidity of the Chronicler\u2019s\ntheology, he allows that even an heinous sinner may repent, and that,\nif he does so, he will meet with Divine acceptance.\n\n\n =14\u201217= (not in 2 Kings).\n THE LATER DEEDS OF MANASSEH.\n\n \u00b9\u2074Now after this he built an outer wall to the city of David,\n on the west side of Gihon, in the valley, even to the entering\n in at the fish gate; and he compassed about Ophel, and raised it\n up a very great height: and he put valiant captains\u00b9 in all the\n fenced cities of Judah.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _captains of the army_.\n\n=14.= _an outer wall ... fish gate_] \u201cThis can only mean that outside\nthe existing rampart of the citadel, on the ridge above the present\nVirgin\u2019s Spring [i.e. St Mary\u2019s Well, see note, xxxii. 3], Manasseh\nconstructed another line of fortification which he carried northwards\npast the Temple Mount, and round its northern slope,\u201d G.\u00a0A. Smith,\n_Jerusalem_, 1. 208. The _fish_-gate was in the northern wall, probably\ncorresponding to the modern Damascus Gate (_Jerusalem_ 1. 202).\n\n_Ophel_] compare xxvii. 3 (note).\n\n \u00b9\u2075And he took away the strange gods, and the idol out of the\n house of the LORD, and all the altars that he had built in the\n mount of the house of the LORD, and in Jerusalem, and cast them\n out of the city.\n\n=15.= _he took away the strange gods_] Compare verse 7.\n\n \u00b9\u2076And he built up\u00b9 the altar of the LORD, and offered thereon\n sacrifices of peace offerings and of thanksgiving, and commanded\n Judah to serve the LORD, the God of Israel.\n\n \u00b9 According to another reading, _prepared_.\n\n=16.= _he built up_] or _he rebuilt_, compare xi. 5 (note).\n\n_peace offerings_] compare 1 Chronicles xvi. 1 (note).\n\n_commanded Judah_] compare verse 9; 2 Kings xxi. 11.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Nevertheless the people did sacrifice still in the high places,\n but only unto the LORD their God.\n\n=17.= _but only_, etc.] See note on xxxii. 12.\n\n\n =18\u201220= (compare 2 Kings xxi. 17, 18).\n THE EPILOGUE TO MANASSEH\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b9\u2078Now the rest of the acts of Manasseh, and his prayer unto his\n God, and the words of the seers that spake to him in the name of\n the LORD, the God of Israel, behold, they are written among the\n acts of the kings of Israel.\n\n=18.= _his prayer_] It was probably upon the ground of this remark\nthat the so-called _Prayer of Manasses_, which in the English editions\nof the Apocrypha occurs just before 1 Maccabees, was composed. The\n\u201cprayer\u201d referred to by the Chronicler is quite certainly not to be\nassociated even remotely with this apocryphal work, which by some is\nthought to have been written originally in Greek, though it has also\nbeen regarded as a Greek translation from some Hebrew midrashic source.\nIts date is uncertain. It is given in a collection of hymns appended\nto the Psalter in the Alexandrine MS. (A) of the LXX. (Swete\u2019s edition\nvol. III. p. 824), and is also found in the Latin Vulgate, though\nthe translation is not by Jerome. See the edition by Ryle in Charles\u2019\n_Apocrypha_, vol. 1.\n\n_the acts of the kings of Israel_] See Introduction \u00a7\u00a05, p. xxxii. Here,\nsince canonical Kings contains no mention whatever of Manasseh\u2019s prayer\nor the words of the seers to him, we see very plainly that this source\nto which the Chronicler so often refers cannot be identical with the\ncanonical books of Kings.\n\n \u00b9\u2079His prayer also, and how _God_ was intreated of him, and all\n his sin and his trespass, and the places wherein he built high\n places, and set up the Asherim and the graven images, before\n he humbled himself: behold, they are written in the history of\n Hozai\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _the seers_ So the Septuagint.\n\n=19.= _in the history of Hozai_] Render, =in the history of the seers=;\ncompare margin and LXX., slightly emending the Hebrew text. To take the\nHebrew word (_\u1e25\u014dzai_) as a proper name is unsuitable, since the same\nword occurs as a common noun (\u201cseers\u201d) in the preceding verse.\n\n \u00b2\u2070So Manasseh slept with his fathers, and they buried him in his\n own house: and Amon his son reigned in his stead.\n\n=20.= _in his own house_] i.e. as in 2 Kings \u201cin the garden of his own\nhouse.\u201d\n\n\n =21\u201225= (= 2 Kings xxi. 19\u201226).\n AMON\u2019S SHORT REIGN. JOSIAH SUCCEEDS HIM.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9Amon was twenty and two years old when he began to reign; and\n he reigned two years in Jerusalem. \u00b2\u00b2And he did that which was\n evil in the sight of the LORD, as did Manasseh his father: and\n Amon sacrificed unto all the graven images which Manasseh his\n father had made, and served them.\n\n=21.= _in Jerusalem_] The Chronicler omits here the name of Amon\u2019s\nmother; compare verse 1.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And he humbled not himself before the LORD, as Manasseh his\n father had humbled himself; but this same Amon trespassed\u00b9 more\n and more. \u00b2\u2074And his servants conspired against him, and put him\n to death in his own house.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _became guilty_.\n\n=23.= _And he humbled not himself_] This verse is not in Kings.\n\n_trespassed_] Render, =became guilty= (so margin); compare xix. 10,\nxxiv. 18, xxviii. 10, 13.\n\n \u00b2\u2075But the people of the land slew all them that had conspired\n against king Amon; and the people of the land made Josiah his\n son king in his stead.\n\n=25.= _slew_] Render, =smote=. The Hebrew word suggests that there was\na conflict between the people and the conspirators.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXIV.\n\n\n =1, 2= (= 2 Kings xxii. 1, 2).\n JOSIAH\u2019S GOOD REIGN.\n\nOf Josiah only good is recorded in Kings: \u201che did that which was\nright in the eyes of the LORD, and walked in all the way of David his\nfather, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left\u201d (2 Kings\nxxii. 2). In the eighteenth year of his reign he is said to have\nordered a repair of the Temple in the course of which a discovery was\nmade of a book of the Law. In consequence of its injunctions a thorough\nreformation was carried out by Josiah, a solemn covenant with God being\nentered into by the king and all the people, and attested first by a\ncrusade against all idolatrous images and symbols throughout the land\nand then by a grand celebration of the Passover feast (2 Kings xxii.\n3\u2012xxiii. 27). Obviously Josiah was a king after the Chronicler\u2019s own\nheart. He makes Josiah\u2019s reforming energy begin as early as his eighth\nyear, causing some changes in the order of events (see the note on\nverse 3). On the record of the Passover feast the Chronicler has\nnaturally fastened with special pleasure, and he expands the brief\nallusions to it in Kings into a detailed account occupying xxxv. 1\u201219.\nHis narrative of the death of Josiah differs considerably from that in\nKings. Several other minor variations are pointed out in the notes\nbelow.\n\n \u00b9Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign; and he\n reigned thirty and one years in Jerusalem.\n\n=1.= _in Jerusalem_] Here the Chronicler omits the name of Josiah\u2019s\nmother; compare xxxiii. 1, 21.\n\n \u00b2And he did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and\n walked in the ways of David his father, and turned not aside to\n the right hand or to the left.\n\n=2.= _turned not aside_, etc.] A commendatory phrase applied to Josiah\nalone of the kings.\n\n\n =3\u20127= (compare verse 33; 2 Kings xxiii. 4\u201220).\n JOSIAH DESTROYS THE SYMBOLS OF IDOLATRY.\n\n \u00b3For in the eighth year of his reign, while he was yet young,\n he began to seek after the God of David his father: and in the\n twelfth year he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high\n places, and the Asherim, and the graven images, and the molten\n images.\n\n=3.= _in the eighth year ... and in the twelfth_] It should be noticed\nthat the order of the events of Josiah\u2019s reign given in Chronicles\nvaries from that given in 2 Kings Thus we have in 2 Chronicles:\n\n(1) Destruction of idolatrous symbols throughout Jerusalem, Judah and\nIsrael; xxxiv. 3\u20127.\n\n(2) Repair of the Temple and Finding of the Law; xxxiv. 8\u201228.\n\n(3) Renewal of the Covenant with Jehovah; xxxiv. 29\u201233.\n\n(4) Great Passover kept; xxxv. 1\u201219.\n\n(5) Death of Josiah; xxxv. 20\u201227.\n\nIn 2 Kings on the other hand (2) and (3) precede (1), and the reforming\nactivity of the king is accordingly placed subsequent to the finding of\nthe Law in the eighteenth year of his reign. There can be little doubt\nthat the order in Kings is correct. The Chronicler thought it desirable\nthat the piety of the king should be displayed earlier, and he has\ntherefore dated its commencement from the eighth and twelfth years.\n[This is preferable to the suggestion that \u201ceighth\u201d (_bish\u0115m\u014dneh_) and\n\u201ctwelfth\u201d (_bisht\u0113ym \u2018esreh_) may be due to a transcriptional error of\n\u201ceighteenth\u201d (_bish\u0115m\u014dneh \u2018esreh_).]\n\n_while he was yet young_] There is no clause corresponding to this in\n2 Kings, and the statement is probably due to the motive indicated in\nthe previous note. There is, of course, no reason to question the piety\nof Josiah in his early years, for though in 2 Kings his reformation is\ndated in the eighteenth year of his reign, i.e. when he was 25 years of\nage (hardly \u201cyoung\u201d for a king), the favourable judgement passed on him\n(2 Kings xxii. 2) is unqualified by any suggestion that he was tardy\nin turning to Jehovah, and the prophetic activity of Jeremiah is dated\nfrom the thirteenth year of Josiah\u2019s reign (Jeremiah xxv. 3).\n\n_in the twelfth year he began_] The Chronicler spreads the cleansing of\nthe land over six years, i.e. from the _twelfth_ to the _eighteenth_;\ncompare verse 8.\n\n_to purge_] Josiah\u2019s measures are more fully enumerated and described\nin 2 Kings xxiii.; notice e.g. the removal of the Asherah from the\nTemple (verse 6), the destruction of the houses of the _\u1e32\u0115d\u0113shim_\n(compare Deuteronomy xxiii. 17, 18) which were in the house of the Lord\n(verse 7), the deportation of priests from the cities of Judah into\nJerusalem (verses 8, 9), and the defiling of Topheth and of Beth-el\n(verses 10, 15, 16). The Chronicler not unnaturally prefers to avoid\nthese details and employs the usual general terms here, partly because\nhe has already credited the penitent Manasseh with a reform of this\ncharacter (xxxiii. 15), partly also because he may have been unwilling\nto suppose that such flagrant abuses in the Temple as are mentioned in\nKings had continued to this date.\n\n_the Asherim_] compare xiv. 3 (note).\n\n \u2074And they brake down the altars of the Baalim in his presence;\n and the sun-images, that were on high above them, he hewed down;\n and the Asherim, and the graven images, and the molten images,\n he brake in pieces, and made dust of them, and strowed it upon\n the graves _of them_ that had sacrificed unto them.\n\n=4.= _the Baalim_] Compare xxxiii. 3 (note).\n\n_the sun-images_] See note on xiv. 5; and compare 2 Kings xxiii. 11.\n\n \u2075And he burnt the bones of the priests upon their altars, and\n purged Judah and Jerusalem.\n\n=5.= _he burnt the bones of the priests_] Specially at Beth-el; 2 Kings\nxxiii. 15, 16.\n\n \u2076And _so did he_ in the cities of Manasseh and Ephraim and\n Simeon, even unto Naphtali, in their ruins\u00b9 round about. \u2077And\n he brake down the altars, and beat the Asherim and the graven\n images into powder, and hewed down all the sun-images throughout\n all the land of Israel, and returned to Jerusalem.\n\n \u00b9 Or, as otherwise read, _with their axes_. The text is\n probably corrupt.\n\n=6.= _Simeon_] Here as in xv. 9 Simeon is regarded as belonging to the\nnorthern tribes, but its cities were in the south; compare the note on\nxv. 9, and 1 Chronicles iv. 28 ff.\n\n_in their ruins_] Remark the margin, \u201c_with their axes_. The text\nis probably corrupt.\u201d The Versions afford no real help. A plausible\nconjecture is given by Curtis, who would read, =he laid waste their\nhouses=.\n\n\n =8\u201228= (= 2 Kings xxii. 3\u201220).\n REPAIR OF THE TEMPLE. DISCOVERY OF THE BOOK OF THE LAW.\n\n \u2078Now in the eighteenth year of his reign, when he had purged\n the land, and the house, he sent Shaphan the son of Azaliah, and\n Maaseiah the governor of the city, and Joah the son of Joahaz\n the recorder\u00b9, to repair the house of the LORD his God.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _chronicler_.\n\n=8.= _Shaphan_] According to 2 Kings he was Scribe. See 1 Chronicles\nxviii. 16 (note).\n\n_the governor of the city_] Render, =a ruler of the city=; compare\nxxix. 20.\n\n_the recorder_] margin =the chronicler=; compare 1 Chronicles xviii. 15\n(note). Neither Maaseiah nor Joah is mentioned in 2 Kings.\n\n_to repair the house of the LORD_] It may be conjectured that the\ndisrepair was not due solely to the abuses of Manasseh\u2019s reign, but was\nconnected with the disaster recorded in xxxiii. 11, when an Assyrian\narmy carried off Manasseh to Babylon. Probably the capture of the king\nwas not achieved without the conquest of Jerusalem, and the Temple\nmay easily have suffered serious damage at that time. Note that Kings\n(which does not record the disaster mentioned in Chronicles) uses\nstrong terms regarding the condition of the Temple when Josiah\u2019s work\nwas put in hand\u2015\u2015\u201cto repair the _breaches_ of the house,\u201d 2 Kings\nxxii. 5.\n\n \u2079And they came to Hilkiah the high priest, and delivered the\n money that was brought into the house of God, which the Levites,\n the keepers of the door\u00b9, had gathered of the hand of Manasseh\n and Ephraim, and of all the remnant of Israel, and of all Judah\n and Benjamin, and of the inhabitants of Jerusalem\u00b2.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _threshold_.\n\n \u00b2 Another reading is, _and they returned to Jerusalem_.\n\n=9.= _And they came ... and delivered_] The matter is differently\nstated in 2 Kings according to which they are sent to Hilkiah with\na message to him to \u201csum,\u201d i.e. to reckon, the total of the money\ncollected in the Temple. The Chronicler has in mind the idea which he\nset forth in xxiv. 6 ff.\u2015\u2015namely, that the money was gathered by a body\nof Levites who went round the country collecting it.\n\n_the Levites, the keepers of the door_] In 2 Kings xii. 9 the keepers\nof the doors are called _priests_; compare 2 Kings xxv. 18.\n\n_of the hand of Manasseh_, etc.] In 2 Kings simply \u201cof the people\u201d:\ni.e. Kings thinks only of the Southern Kingdom; the Chronicler includes\nthe remnant of the northern tribes. But see also the note on xv. 9.\n\n_and of the inhabitants of Jerusalem_] So one reading of the Hebrew\n(the _Keth\u012bb_), in agreement with the LXX. The margin =and they\nreturned to Jerusalem= follows the other reading (the _\u1e32er\u012b_).\n\n \u00b9\u2070And they delivered it into the hand of the workmen that had\n the oversight of the house of the LORD; and the workmen\u00b9 that\n wrought in the house of the LORD gave it to amend and repair the\n house;\n\n \u00b9 Or, _they gave it_ to _the workmen_ &c. See 2 Kings xxii. 5.\n\n=10.= _and the workmen that wrought in the house of the LORD gave it_]\nThe \u201cworkmen\u201d are distinguished from the \u201ccarpenters and builders\u201d\n(verse 11); overseers of some kind are meant. _To oversee the work_\nand _to do the work_ may be synonymous phrases here as in 1 Chronicles\nxxiii. 4 and 1 Chronicles xxiii. verse 24. On the other hand 2 Kings\nxxii. 5 favours the rendering \u201cAnd they (i.e. Shaphan, etc., and\nHilkiah, verses 8, 9) delivered it into the hand of the workmen that\nhad the oversight ... _and they_ (i.e. these overseers) _gave it to the\nworkmen_ that wrought....\u201d (Compare the margin.)\n\n \u00b9\u00b9even to the carpenters and to the builders gave they it, to\n buy hewn stone, and timber for couplings, and to make beams for\n the houses which the kings of Judah had destroyed.\n\n=11.= _the houses_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxviii. 11.\n\n \u00b9\u00b2And the men did the work faithfully: and the overseers of them\n were Jahath and Obadiah, the Levites, of the sons of Merari; and\n Zechariah and Meshullam, of the sons of the Kohathites, to set\n it forward\u00b9: and _other of_ the Levites, all that could skill\n of instruments of music. \u00b9\u00b3Also they were over the bearers of\n burdens, and set forward all that did the work in every manner\n of service: and of the Levites there were scribes, and officers,\n and porters.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _to preside over it_.\n\n=12.= _the overseers_] There is no parallel in 2 Kings for the rest\nof this verse and for verse 13. The addition is characteristic of\nthe Chronicler, exemplifying (1)\u00a0his habit of inserting proper names,\n(2)\u00a0his interest in the Levites, particularly the musical class.\n\n_to set it forward_] The same Hebrew word is used in 1 Chronicles xxiii.\n4, and is there rendered \u201cto oversee the work.\u201d (Compare the margin.)\n\n_could skill_] \u201cSkill\u201d is used as a verb also in ii. 7, 8. _Skill of\ninstruments_ = \u201cplay skilfully upon instruments.\u201d\n\n \u00b9\u2074And when they brought out the money that was brought into the\n house of the LORD, Hilkiah the priest found the book of the law\n of the LORD given by\u00b9 Moses.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _by the hand of_.\n\n=14.= This verse has no parallel in 2 Kings.\n\n_the book of the law_] See the Additional Note at the end of the\nchapter, pp. 337 ff.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, I have\n found the book of the law in the house of the LORD. And Hilkiah\n delivered the book to Shaphan. \u00b9\u2076And Shaphan carried the book to\n the king, and moreover brought the king word again, saying, All\n that was committed to thy servants, they do it. \u00b9\u2077And they have\n emptied out\u00b9 the money that was found in the house of the LORD,\n and have delivered it into the hand of the overseers, and into\n the hand of the workmen.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _poured out_.\n\n=15.= _answered and said_] For the use of \u201canswer\u201d where no question\nhad been asked compare xxix. 31, note.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And Shaphan the scribe told the king, saying, Hilkiah the\n priest hath delivered me a book. And Shaphan read therein before\n the king.\n\n=18.= _And Shaphan read therein_] Contrast 2 Kings, \u201cAnd Shaphan read\nit,\u201d implying that he read the whole book, which of course was a simple\nmatter, if it consisted of the nucleus of Deuteronomy (see note, verse\n14). The Chronicler, however, believing the book to have been the whole\nPentateuch, could not suppose that the _whole_ was read to the king,\nand accordingly he writes _therein_ in place of _it_.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the\n law, that he rent his clothes.\n\n=19.= _rent his clothes_] A sign of grief. \u201cClothes\u201d is in the plural\nbecause both inner and outer garments are meant. See Ezra ix. 3 (with\nRyle\u2019s note).\n\n \u00b2\u2070And the king commanded Hilkiah, and Ahikam the son of Shaphan,\n and Abdon the son of Micah\u00b9, and Shaphan the scribe, and Asaiah\n the king\u2019s servant, saying,\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xxii. 12, _Achbor the son of Micaiah_.\n\n=20.= _Ahikam the son of Shaphan_] Compare Jeremiah xxvi. 24, xl. 5.\n\n_Abdon the son of Micah_] In 2 Kings \u201cAchbor the son of Micaiah.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u00b9Go ye, inquire of the LORD for me, and for them that are left\n in Israel and in Judah, concerning the words of the book that\n is found: for great is the wrath of the LORD that is poured out\n upon us, because our fathers have not kept the word of the LORD,\n to do according unto all that is written in this book.\n\n=21.= _for them that are left in Israel_] Not in 2 Kings The Chronicler\nlikes to mention the remnants of the northern tribes, as in verses 6, 9.\n\n_that is poured out upon us_] In 2 Kings \u201cthat is kindled against us,\u201d\nso LXX. \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03ad\u03ba\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. Compare verse 25.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2So Hilkiah, and they whom the king _had commanded_, went to\n Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tokhath\u00b9,\n the son of Hasrah\u00b2, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in\n Jerusalem in the second quarter\u00b3;) and they spake to her to that\n effect. \u00b2\u00b3And she said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, the God\n of Israel: Tell ye the man that sent you unto me,\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xxii. 14, _Tikvah_.\n\n \u00b2 In 2 Kings xxii. 14, _Harhas_.\n\n \u00b3 Hebrew _Mishneh_.\n\n=22.= had commanded] These words, which are obviously required, are\nnot in the Hebrew: the verb _\u0101mar_ has fallen out of the text by some\naccident.\n\n_the prophetess_] This title is given to Miriam (Exodus xv. 20),\nDeborah (Judges iv. 4), Anna (Luke ii. 36); compare also Nehemiah\nvi. 14; Revelation ii. 20.\n\n_Tokhath_] In 2 Kings _Tikvah_.\n\n_Hasrah_] In 2 Kings _Harhas_.\n\n_keeper of the wardrobe_] Literally \u201ckeeper of the garments.\u201d The\nHebrew word for garments (_b\u0115g\u0101dim]_) is applied to a king\u2019s robes\n(xviii. 29), to a high-priest\u2019s vestments (Exodus xxviii. 2, 4), and\nto clothes in general; it is therefore not easy to say what office\nprecisely is here referred to. Perhaps the garments here meant were\necclesiastical and not royal. There is ample evidence that ancient\ntemples possessed a store of ceremonial garments for the use not only\nof the worshippers but also of the images, compare 2 Kings x. 22, and\ngenerally the _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9 s.v. _costume_, pp. 230a,\n231b. As early as the VIth dynasty an Egyptian priest is mentioned as\n\u201cmaster of the wardrobe.\u201d\n\n_in the second quarter_] Or, _in the second division_. Compare\nZephaniah i. 10. The physical configuration of ancient Jerusalem was\nsuch that it might naturally be regarded as divided into two districts,\nthe eastern and western, with the valley of the Tyrop\u0153on between.\nCompare Nehemiah iii. 9, 12, and also Nehemiah xi. 9 (with Ryle\u2019s note\non _second over the city_, which should probably be rendered _over the\nsecond part of the city_).\n\n \u00b2\u2074Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place,\n and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the curses that are\n written in the book which they have read before the king of\n Judah: \u00b2\u2075because they have forsaken me, and have burned incense\n unto other gods, that they might provoke me to anger with all\n the works of their hands; therefore is my wrath poured out upon\n this place, and it shall not be quenched.\n\n=24.= _all the curses_] Deuteronomy xxvii. 15\u201226, xxviii. 15\u201268.\n\n \u00b2\u2076But unto the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the\n LORD, thus shall ye say to him, Thus saith the LORD, the God of\n Israel: As touching the words which thou hast heard, \u00b2\u2077because\n thine heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before\n God, when thou heardest his words against this place, and\n against the inhabitants thereof, and hast humbled thyself before\n me, and hast rent thy clothes, and wept before me; I also have\n heard thee, saith the LORD.\n\n=26.= _As touching the words which thou hast heard, because thine\nheart_] Read perhaps, =Inasmuch as thou hast heard my words, and thine\nheart=. There is some slight flaw in the Hebrew text.\n\n \u00b2\u2078Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers, and thou shalt be\n gathered to thy grave in peace, neither shall thine eyes see\n all the evil that I will bring upon this place, and upon the\n inhabitants thereof. And they brought the king word again.\n\n=28.= _thou shalt be gathered to thy grave in peace_] So also in 2\nKings But in point of fact Josiah met with a violent death, being slain\nby Neco, king of Egypt, according both to Kings (2 Kings xxiii. 29) and\nChronicles (2 Chronicles xxxv. 23 f.). From the contradiction between\nthis prediction and the event, we may infer that in the prophecy of\nHuldah we have an old and reliable tradition, which obviously must\nhave been made before the death of Josiah. That the contradiction\nwas allowed to stand in Kings is not perhaps surprising, but it is\nremarkable in the Chronicler\u2019s narrative. Not only does the idea\nof a genuine prophecy failing to come true run counter to his fixed\nprinciples, but (judging from many definite instances as well as from\nthe whole tone of his history) the tradition that a king so pious\nfrom the start to the finish of his reign should meet his death in a\ndisastrous battle must have seemed to him well-nigh incredible. The\nfact remains that he _has_ allowed the tradition to stand, but it is\ncertainly surprising.\n\n_neither shall thine eyes see_] Compare the similar promise made to\nAhab (1 Kings xxi. 29).\n\n\n =29\u201233= (= 2 Kings xxiii. 1\u20123).\n THE RENEWAL OF THE COVENANT WITH JEHOVAH.\n\nThis renewal of the covenant should be compared with the passage\ndescribing Hezekiah\u2019s great service of atonement for the breach of\nthe covenant (xxix. 20 ff.).\n\n \u00b2\u2079Then the king sent and gathered together all the elders of\n Judah and Jerusalem. \u00b3\u2070And the king went up to the house of the\n LORD, and all the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem,\n and the priests, and the Levites, and all the people, both great\n and small: and he read in their ears all the words of the book\n of the covenant that was found in the house of the LORD.\n\n=30.= _the Levites_] In 2 Kings \u201cthe prophets.\u201d\n\n \u00b3\u00b9And the king stood in his place, and made a covenant before\n the LORD, to walk after the LORD, and to keep his commandments,\n and his testimonies, and his statutes, with all his heart, and\n with all his soul, to perform the words of the covenant that\n were written in this book. \u00b3\u00b2And he caused all that were found\n in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand _to it_. And the inhabitants\n of Jerusalem did according to the covenant of God, the God of\n their fathers.\n\n=31.= _to walk after the LORD_] Compare Deuteronomy x. 12, 13.\n\n \u00b3\u00b3And Josiah took away all the abominations out of all the\n countries that pertained to the children of Israel, and made all\n that were found in Israel to serve, even to serve the LORD their\n God. All his days they departed not from following the LORD, the\n God of their fathers.\n\n=33.= _And Josiah took away_] Compare verses 3\u20127.\n\n_all that were found in Israel_] i.e. the remnant of the northern\ntribes, compare verse 21.\n\n_All his days_] Contrast the evil record of his son Jehoiakim, xxxvi.\n5\u20128.\n\n\n ADDITIONAL NOTE ON VERSE 14.\n\n_Hilkiah the priest found the book of the law of the LORD_] This\nremarkable statement has proved to be a fruitful subject of discussion.\nWhat precisely is meant by \u201cthe book of the law\u201d said to have been\nfound by Hilkiah in the Temple? It is essential to distinguish between\nthe answer which the Chronicler would have given to this question\nand the conclusions reached by an independent survey of the problem.\n(1)\u00a0Undoubtedly the Chronicler supposed \u201cthe book of the law\u201d to be\nthe whole Pentateuch, since he believed that the entire Law existed\nas it now is from the time of Moses. The argument against his view\nis obvious to us at the present time. Beside the practical objection\nof the impossibility of reading the whole Pentateuchal Law twice in\nsuccession to different persons on the same day (2 Kings xxii. 8,\n10)\u2015\u2015a difficulty which perhaps the Chronicler himself perceived and\nsought to avoid, see note on verse 18,\u2015\u2015there is the overwhelming\ntestimony of the general evidence that a large part of the Pentateuch\n_in its final form_, with which the Chronicler was familiar, is of\npost-exilic date. _His_ Pentateuch was quite certainly not \u201cthe book\u201d\nfound by Hilkiah. (2)\u00a0It is extremely interesting to observe that\nthe first step towards the judgement of modern criticism was taken\nat a very early date and by certain of the Christian Fathers\u2015\u2015Jerome,\nProcopius of Gaza, Chrysostom\u2015\u2015who put forward the view that the\nbook in question was not the whole Pentateuch but only the Book\nof Deuteronomy. [For the details the student must be referred to\narticles in the _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr alttestamentliche Wissenschaft_, 1902,\npp. 170 f., 312 f., and the _Journal of Biblical Literature_, 1903,\np. 50.] This view, first developed scientifically by De Wette, gained\neventually a very wide acceptance amongst scholars. Stress is laid\nupon the resemblance between the reforms ascribed to Josiah and the\nexhortations and injunctions of Deuteronomy, particularly as regards\nthe restriction of sacrificial worship to one sanctuary (i.e. Jerusalem;\ncompare Deuteronomy xii. 10\u201214). For the evidence the student may\nconsult Chapman, _Introduction to the Pentateuch_, pp. 135\u2012146,\nespecially pp. 142\u2012145 (in this series); or Driver, _Deuteronomy_\n(International Critical Commentaries), pp. xliv ff. (3)\u00a0Further,\ninternal consideration of the Book of Deuteronomy has led to the\nconclusion that it cannot all date from the time of Josiah: and\nthus it is now generally held that Hilkiah\u2019s \u201cbook of the law\u201d\nwas not the final form of Deuteronomy, but only the _nucleus_ of\nthat Book\u2015\u2015probably chapters v.\u2012xxvi. and xxviii., or xii.\u2012xxvi.\nand xxviii., or even certain passages from those chapters (see\nChapman, _Introduction to the Pentateuch_, pp. 144, 145; or Driver,\n_Deuteronomy_, pp. lxv ff.). (4)\u00a0Finally, there are grounds for\ndoubting whether any part of Deuteronomy can be dated from the time\nof Josiah. It is suggested that the Deuteronomic code is not earlier\nthan Jeremiah but later. Although this view does not yet command\ngeneral acceptance, it is fair to insist that it rests upon evidence\nwhich cannot be so lightly set aside as is occasionally supposed.\nThe student may conveniently refer to remarks by R.\u00a0H. Kennett in\nthe _Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics_, vol. VII., s.v. _Israel_\np. 447, and to the references there given, especially the _Journal\nof Theological Studies_, VII. [1906], pp. 481 ff. If Deuteronomy be\nlater than the time of Josiah, what then can we suppose this \u201cbook of\nthe law\u201d (_s\u0113pher hatt\u014drah_) to have been; for there is no reason to\nquestion the accuracy of the tradition that some impressive writing was\ndiscovered in the Temple? The answer will be\u2015\u2015in all probability\u2015\u2015some\nscroll of prophetic teaching, in which the abuses of worship (perhaps\nin Manasseh\u2019s reign) and in particular the corruptions of the country\n\u201chigh places\u201d were searchingly denounced and an appeal made for\nreform. Since at that date the term _t\u014drah_ was applicable to prophetic\nteaching as well as to legal instruction, such a work would be known\nas \u201ca book of _t\u014drah_.\u201d It is not a very serious objection that the\ntext here and in Kings reads \u201cthe book of the law (_hatt\u014drah_),\u201d\npartly because a peculiarity of Hebrew grammar would still allow the\ntranslation \u201ca book of _t\u014drah_,\u201d partly because the introduction of\nthe definite article into the text would be most natural, so soon as\nit came to be thought that the phrase referred to Deuteronomy or the\nPentateuch. We may summarise as follows:\u2015\u2015To the Chronicler \u201cthe book\nof the law\u201d signified the whole Pentateuch in its final form; to the\ncompilers or editors of Kings (the Chronicler\u2019s _source_), who probably\nwrote at the \u201cDeuteronomic\u201d stage of the history, it no doubt meant\nDeuteronomy; and lastly, according to modern judgement the book\nactually discovered was either the earliest or essential portions of\nDeuteronomy or possibly a pre-Deuteronomic prophetic writing demanding\nthe purification of worship in Jerusalem and urging the abolition of\nthe sacrifices and feasts at the local shrines.\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXV.\n\n\n =1\u201219= (= 1 Esdras i. 1\u201222; compare 2 Kings xxiii. 21\u201223).\n JOSIAH\u2019S PASSOVER.\n\nRegarding the reference to 1 Esdras i. in the heading above, see the\nIntroduction \u00a7\u00a010, s.v. _Greek Versions_, where the important fact is\nnoted that in 1 Esdras we have an _old_ LXX. text, earlier than the\nso-called LXX. of Chronicles, and representing a Hebrew text older than\nthe present Masoretic form. For introduction and notes on the text of\n1 Esdras see the edition by S.\u00a0A. Cook in Charles\u2019 _Apocrypha_, vol. I.\n\n \u00b9And Josiah kept a passover unto the LORD in Jerusalem: and\n they killed the passover on the fourteenth _day_ of the first\n month.\n\n=1.= _the first month_] The legal month was _Nisan_, or as it was\ncalled in pre-exilic times _Abib_; compare Exodus xii. Compare also\nxxx. 2 (with note).\n\n \u00b2And he set the priests in their charges, and encouraged them to\n the service of the house of the LORD.\n\n=2.= _in their charges_] i.e. at their duties.\n\n_encouraged them_] As Hezekiah had done; compare xxix. 5\u201211, xxx. 22.\n\n \u00b3And he said unto the Levites that taught all Israel, which were\n holy unto the LORD, Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon\n the son of David king of Israel did build; there shall no more\n be a burden upon your shoulders: now serve the LORD your God,\n and his people Israel.\n\n=3.= _that taught all Israel_] Compare Nehemiah viii. 7, 9.\n\n_Put the holy ark in the house_] This rather curious remark seems to\nimply that the ark had been removed from the Temple either by Manasseh\nor by Josiah during the repairing of the house. The Levites are bidden\nto set it in its place without delay, and to devote themselves to the\ntasks related in verses 4 ff.\n\n \u2074And prepare yourselves after your fathers\u2019 houses by your\n courses, according to the writing of David king of Israel, and\n according to the writing of Solomon his son.\n\n=4.= _the writing of David_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxiii. 27, xxviii.\n19\u201221.\n\n \u2075And stand in the holy place according to the divisions of the\n fathers\u2019 houses of your brethren the children of the people, and\n _let there be for each_ a portion of a fathers\u2019 house\u00b9 of the\n Levites.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _and_ according to _the distribution of each fathers\u2019\n house_.\n\n=5.= _the children of the people_] i.e. the laity. The same phrase\nis translated in 2 Kings xxiii. 6 \u201cthe common people\u201d (without any\ninvidious meaning).\n\nlet there be for each _a portion ... of the Levites_] Each great\ndivision of the laity was to be served by a small division of the\nLevites.\n\n \u2076And kill the passover, and sanctify yourselves, and prepare for\n your brethren, to do according to the word of the LORD by the\n hand of Moses.\n\n=6.= _prepare for your brethren_] Compare verses 12, 13.\n\n \u2077And Josiah gave\u00b9 to the children of the people, of the flock,\n lambs and kids, all of them for the passover offerings, unto all\n that were present, to the number of thirty thousand, and three\n thousand bullocks: these were of the king\u2019s substance.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _gave for offerings_ and so in verses 8, 9. See chapter\n xxx. 24.\n\n=7.= _gave_] margin _gave for offerings_; compare xxx. 24, where it is\nsaid that Hezekiah did the same at his great Passover.\n\n \u2078And his princes gave for\u00b9 a freewill offering unto the people,\n to the priests, and to the Levites. Hilkiah and Zechariah and\n Jehiel, the rulers of the house of God, gave unto the priests\n for the passover offerings two thousand and six hundred _small\n cattle_, and three hundred oxen.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _willingly_.\n\n=8.= _for a freewill offering_] Better, as Authorized Version and\nmargin, =willingly=.\n\n_Jehiel_] 1 Esdras (\u1f28\u03c3\u03cd\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2) suggests a different name, probably\n_Haziel_.\n\n_rulers of the house of God_] Compare 1 Chronicles ix. 11, note.\n\n \u2079Conaniah also, and Shemaiah and Nethanel, his brethren, and\n Hashabiah and Jeiel and Jozabad, the chiefs of the Levites, gave\n unto the Levites for the passover offerings five thousand _small\n cattle_, and five hundred oxen.\n\n=9.= _Conaniah ... and Shemaiah_] Compare the \u201cConaniah and Shimei his\nbrother\u201d of xxxi. 12, and for _Jozabad_ compare the \u201cJozabad\u201d of xxxi.\n13. Different persons, however, must surely be meant, or perhaps the\nnames represent families rather than individuals; nearly sixty years\nseparate the reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah.\n\n \u00b9\u2070So the service was prepared, and the priests stood in their\n place, and the Levites by their courses, according to the king\u2019s\n commandment.\n\n=10\u201213.= The variations in 1 Esdras i. 10\u201212 are misunderstandings of\nthe Hebrew; see Cook, _Apocrypha_.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9And they killed the passover, and the priests sprinkled _the\n blood, which they received_ of their hand, \u00b9\u00b2and the Levites\n flayed them. And they removed the burnt offerings, that they\n might give them according to the divisions of the fathers\u2019\n houses of the children of the people, to offer unto the LORD,\n as it is written in the book of Moses. And so did they with the\n oxen.\n\n=11.= _sprinkled_] Compare xxix. 22, note.\n\n_the Levites flayed_] Compare xxix. 34.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And they roasted the passover with fire according to the\n ordinance: and the holy offerings sod they in pots, and in\n caldrons, and in pans, and carried them quickly to all the\n children of the people.\n\n=13.= _the ordinance_] Exodus xii. 9.\n\n_and the holy offerings_] The bullocks mentioned in verses 7, 8, 9.\nPossibly these were slain not on the Passover day itself, but on the\ndays which immediately followed. The practice of later times, however,\nseems to have admitted the sacrifice of oxen as a thank offering along\nwith the Passover lambs (see Mishnah, _Pesachim_, vi. 3, 4); and it\nis possible that in the Chronicler\u2019s time oxen were thus killed and\neaten on the Passover day, although they were, as this verse indicates,\nprepared differently from the Passover lambs.\n\n \u00b9\u2074And afterward they prepared for themselves, and for the\n priests; because the priests the sons of Aaron _were busied_ in\n offering the burnt offerings and the fat until night: therefore\n the Levites prepared for themselves, and for the priests the\n sons of Aaron.\n\n=14.= _the fat_] Compare vii. 7, note; xxix. 35.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the singers the sons of Asaph were in their place,\n according to the commandment of David, and Asaph, and Heman, and\n Jeduthun the king\u2019s seer; and the porters were at every gate:\n they needed not to depart from their service, for their brethren\n the Levites prepared for them.\n\n=15.= _the singers_] Compare 1 Chronicles xxv. 1 ff.\n\n_Heman_] But 1 Esdras has _Zacharias_, a reading which finds some\nsupport in 1 Chronicles xv. 18, xvi. 5.\n\n \u00b9\u2076So all the service of the LORD was prepared the same day, to\n keep the passover, and to offer burnt offerings upon the altar\n of the LORD, according to the commandment of king Josiah. \u00b9\u2077And\n the children of Israel that were present kept the passover at\n that time, and the feast of unleavened bread seven days.\n\n=16.= _the same day_] Literally \u201con that day,\u201d i.e. the fourteenth of\nNisan.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And there was no passover like to that kept in Israel from\n the days of Samuel the prophet; neither did any of the kings of\n Israel keep such a passover as Josiah kept, and the priests, and\n the Levites, and all Judah and Israel that were present, and the\n inhabitants of Jerusalem.\n\n=18.= _there was no passover like to that kept in Israel from the days\nof Samuel_] The statement is simply a reproduction of 2 Kings xxiii.\n22, where we read \u201cthere was not kept such a passover from the days of\nthe judges that judged Israel ... but in the eighteenth year of king\nJosiah was this passover kept to the LORD in Jerusalem.\u201d Actually\nthe novelty of Josiah\u2019s festival was (i) that it was kept _in\nJerusalem_, whereas previously the Passover had been a household feast\nobserved at any \u201chigh-place\u201d throughout the country, and (ii)\u00a0that\nit thus marked the inauguration of the system of only one legitimate\nsanctuary\u2015\u2015Jerusalem\u2015\u2015which was codified in Deuteronomy. The writer in\nKings may have clearly understood that the point lay in the words \u201cin\nJerusalem.\u201d To the Chronicler, the statement meant merely an assertion\nthat this feast was the _grandest_ Passover since the days of the\njudges (he prefers to write _since Samuel_, reckoning him the last of\nthe judges).\n\nA similar but not identical remark regarding Hezekiah\u2019s Passover is\nmade in xxx. 26\u2015\u2015\u201csince the time of Solomon there was not the like in\nJerusalem.\u201d In some points Hezekiah\u2019s feast as described in xxx. 1 ff.\nmay be said to have surpassed Josiah\u2019s, but it is most unnecessary and\nindeed pedantic so to magnify this fact as to insist that the sweeping\nassertion of the present verse about Josiah\u2019s Passover cannot be\nfrom the same source as xxx. 1\u201226. Both passages may well be from the\nChronicler (so Curtis, p. 471); in xxx. 1 ff. he was writing a free\ndescription of Hezekiah\u2019s feast, and the verse (xxx. 26) quoted above\nwas written by him to impress us duly with its magnificence; in the\npresent verse he was naturally reproducing his source in Kings, and\nit is most unlikely that he would notice any slight inconsistency with\nxxx. 26, or that, if he did, he would have been troubled thereby.\n\n_from the days of Samuel_] In 2 Kings xxiii. 22 \u201cfrom the days of the\njudges.\u201d\n\n\u00b9\u2079In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah was this\npassover kept.\n\n=19.= _In the eighteenth year_] Comparison of the later Greek version\n(the so-called LXX.) of this verse with the earlier Greek version\n(the _old_ LXX.) preserved in 1 Esdras reveals that this passage is\none of great interest for the history of the text. After verse 19 \u201cIn\nthe eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah was this passover kept,\u201d\n1 Esdras i. 23, 24 has a remarkable addition as follows: \u201cAnd the works\nof Josias were upright before his LORD with a heart full of godliness.\nMoreover the things that came to pass in his days [or \u2018the things\nconcerning him\u2019] have been written in times past concerning ... those\nthat sinned and did wickedly against the LORD above every people and\nkingdom, and how they grieved him exceedingly, so that the words of\nthe LORD were confirmed against Israel.\u201d Then follows verse 25 (compare\nHebrew verse 20) \u201cNow after all these acts of Josias it came to pass\nthat Pharaoh, king of Egypt,\u201d etc. Probably some words have been lost\nat the point where the dots are placed. As it stands, the passage\n_seems_ to associate the reign of the godly Josiah with wicked and\nirreligious doings. The inference to be drawn is that this passage\nwas originally part of the Hebrew text (from which the old LXX. was\ntranslated), but was subsequently excised on account of its apparent\naspersion on the character of Josiah. The gap thus created was filled\nin some Hebrew MSS. by the insertion of 2 Kings xxiii. 24\u201227, and from\nsuch a Hebrew text the later Greek version (the present LXX.) was made.\nIn other Hebrew MSS., however, the gap was left unfilled, and from one\nof these was derived the Hebrew text which has reached us (see Torrey,\n_Ezra Studies_, pp. 87\u201289). It is only by the use of the Greek versions\nthat we are now able to perceive that an omission has been made.\n\n\n =20\u201224= (= 1 Esdras i. 25\u201231; compare 2 Kings xxiii. 29, 30a).\n THE DEATH OF JOSIAH.\n\nThe account of Josiah\u2019s death is very much fuller in Chronicles\nthan in Kings. The features which are peculiar to the Chronicler are,\n(1)\u00a0Neco\u2019s message to dissuade Josiah from war, (2) Josiah\u2019s disguising\nhimself and coming to fight _in the valley of Megiddo_, (3)\u00a0the\nwounding of Josiah by archers, (4)\u00a0the transfer of the wounded king\nfrom a war chariot to another chariot. Thus all the details which\nrepresent the meeting at Megiddo as a battle are peculiar to Chronicles.\n\nThe account given in Kings is simply:\u2015\u2015\u201cKing Josiah _went to meet_ him\n(Neco), and he put him to death _at Megiddo_ when he saw him. And his\nservants carried him in a chariot dead from Megiddo, and brought him to\nJerusalem.\u201d The Hebrew expression for \u201cwent to meet\u201d in this passage is\nthe same as in 1 Kings xviii. 16; 2 Kings xvi. 10; it does not suggest\na _hostile_ meeting, though it can be used in a suitable context to\ndescribe one. The phrase \u201cwhen he saw him\u201d suggests an interview rather\nthan a battle. Thus we have two versions of Josiah\u2019s death: according\nto Chronicles he was mortally wounded in battle, according to Kings he\nsought an interview with Neco and was assassinated by him at the town\nof Megiddo.\n\nThese differences may be due to two distinct traditions, but it\nseems more probable that the Chronicler\u2019s account is an intentional\nadaptation of the Kings narrative to suit the main principles of his\nwork. We can easily realise that the bald fact of Josiah\u2019s death at\nthe hands of Neco presented a distressing moral perplexity to the\nChronicler\u2019s mind. Why, when Josiah had been so diligent in the service\nof his God, did Jehovah abandon him to death in this fashion? The\nstress of the problem is reflected in the rather pathetic phrase of\nverse 20, \u201cAfter _all_ this ... came Neco.\u201d The same words are used\nof Hezekiah (xxxii. 1), \u201cAfter these things and this faithfulness,\nSennacherib came ...,\u201d but in his case the sore trial of faith proved\nto be for the greater glory of the God of Israel. Here the plea of a\nsuccessful issue to the trouble was not available, and no doubt the\nstory of Josiah\u2019s end was too famous to be passed over in silence. It\nwould seem as if the Chronicler therefore adapted the narrative so as\nto make it appear that Josiah made an attack on Neco in defiance of\na Divine warning (verse 21), and thus deserved his fate. The somewhat\nsimilar tale of Ahab\u2019s death (xviii. 28\u201234 = 1 Kings xxii. 29\u201237) was\nin the Chronicler\u2019s mind, and he appears to have drawn upon it for\ncertain details introduced into his version of Josiah\u2019s end (see verses\n22, 23).\n\n \u00b2\u2070After all this, when Josiah had prepared the temple, Neco\n king of Egypt went up to fight against Carchemish by Euphrates:\n and Josiah went out against him.\n\n=20.= _Neco_] This was Neco II who reigned 610\u2012594 B.C. (Flinders\nPetrie, _History of Egypt_, III. 335). According to Herodotus (II. 159)\nhe conquered the \u201cSyrians\u201d at \u201cMagdolus,\u201d and then captured Cadytis\n(Kadesh on the Orontes, _or_ Gaza?), an important city of Syria.\nHerodotus no doubt refers to the same great campaign of Neco which is\nrecorded in Kings and Chronicles, though it is not at all likely that\nthe victory over the _Syrians_ at _Magdolus_ is to be identified with\nthe encounter of Neco and Josiah at Megiddo. The account of Herodotus\nis obscure, ambiguous, and defective, but a comparison of 2 Kings with\nan inscription of Nabu-na\u2019id king of Babylon (555\u2012538 B.C.) sets Neco\u2019s\naction in a clearer light. The campaign (which took place about 608\nB.C.) was directed \u201cagainst the king of Assyria\u201d (2 Kings xxiii. 29),\ni.e. against the last king Sin-\u0161ari\u0161kun (Saracos) who was at war with\nNabopolassar (father of Nebuchadrezzar), king of Babylon. Nabopolassar,\nhard pressed, called in to his help the Umman-manda (Scythians),\nwho destroyed Nineveh _circa_ 607 B.C.; compare Messerschmidt, _Die\nInschrift der Stele Nabu-na\u2019id\u2019s_ (pp. 5\u201213). Neco advanced to the\nEuphrates to secure some of the spoils of the Assyrian overthrow, but\nthe crushing victory of Nebuchadrezzar over Neco at Carchemish (_circa_\n605 B.C.) finally excluded Egypt from any share.\n\n_against Carchemish_] compare Jeremiah xlvi. 2. It was a city situated\nnear the junction of the Habor and Euphrates. In 2 Kings, \u201cagainst the\nking of Assyria.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u00b9But he sent ambassadors to him, saying, What have I to do\n with thee, thou king of Judah? _I come_ not against thee this\n day, but against the house wherewith I have war; and God hath\n commanded me to make haste\u00b9: forbear thee from _meddling with_\n God, who is with me, that he destroy thee not.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _hath given command to speed me_.\n\n=21.= _against the house wherewith I have war_] In 1 Esdras i. 27 there\nis a different reading, \u201cmy war is upon Euphrates.\u201d\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Nevertheless Josiah would not turn his face from him, but\n disguised himself, that he might fight with him, and hearkened\n not unto the words of Neco, from the mouth of God, and came to\n fight in the valley of Megiddo.\n\n=22.= _disguised himself_] Like Ahab at Ramoth-gilead (xviii. 29), to\nreduce the risk. The LXX. reads \u1f10\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7, \u201cwas strengthened.\u201d The\nHebrew text is probably correct (see Torrey, _Ezra Studies_, p. 221).\n\n_the valley of Megiddo_] Compare Judges v. 19; Zechariah xii. 11. In 1\nEsdras i. 29, \u201cthe _plain_ of Megiddo.\u201d The whole (or perhaps only the\nwestern part) of the plain of Esdraelon is meant; compare 1 Chronicles\nx. 7, note.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3And the archers shot at king Josiah; and the king said to his\n servants, Have me away; for I am sore wounded.\n\n=23.= _the archers shot_] Compare the death of Ahab, xviii. 33. 1\nEsdras i. 29, \u201cthe princes came down against king Josias,\u201d is an\ninferior reading due probably to a misreading of the Hebrew.\n\n_for I am sore wounded_] The very words ascribed to Ahab (xviii. 33),\nand further the verb rendered _I am wounded_ is used only in these\ntwo passages: a singularly strong witness to the view that the present\nstory has been influenced by that of Ahab\u2019s death.\n\n \u00b2\u2074So his servants took him out of the chariot, and put him in\n the second chariot that he had, and brought him to Jerusalem;\n and he died, and was buried in the sepulchres of his fathers.\n And all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah.\n\n=24.= _the second chariot_] War chariots were small, with (apparently)\nonly standing room for their occupants; see the illustrations of\nEgyptian and Assyrian chariots given in the _Encyclopedia Biblia_ I.\n724\u2012730. This \u201csecond chariot\u201d was probably of a larger kind, suitable\nfor travelling.\n\n\n =25= (= 1 Esdras i. 32; not in 2 Kings).\n THE LAMENTATIONS FOR JOSIAH.\n\n \u00b2\u2075And Jeremiah lamented for Josiah: and all the singing men and\n singing women spake of Josiah in their lamentations, unto this\n day; and they made them an ordinance in Israel: and, behold,\n they are written in the lamentations.\n\n=25.= _lamented_] i.e. \u201ccomposed (_or_ uttered) an elegy.\u201d The Hebrew\nword (_\u0137\u014dn\u0113n_) suggests formal composition, and the actual words of\nlamentation are often given, as in 2 Samuel i. 17 ff., iii. 33, 34;\nEzekiel xxvii. 33, xxxii. 2, 16. The elegy in question is not preserved\nin the book of Jeremiah or elsewhere. Doubtless the Chronicler or his\nsource had real grounds for his statement about the popular Songs of\nLament for Josiah, and we may suppose that one of these, rightly or\nwrongly, was ascribed to Jeremiah.\n\n_an ordinance_] compare 2 Samuel i. 18.\n\n_in the lamentations_] In some lost work, not in our canonical book\nof the Lamentations, for the contents of the canonical book lend no\nsupport whatever to the view that it is referred to here (see further\n_Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, s.v. _Lamentations_, p. 128).\n\n\n =26, 27= (= 1 Esdras i. 33; 2 Kings xxiii. 25, 28).\n THE EPILOGUE TO JOSIAH\u2019S REIGN.\n\n \u00b2\u2076Now the rest of the acts of Josiah, and his good deeds,\n according to that which is written in the law of the LORD, \u00b2\u2077and\n his acts, first and last, behold, they are written in the book\n of the kings of Israel and Judah.\n\n=26.= _according to that which is written_] Compare the strong terms\nused in 2 Kings xxiii. 25, \u201clike unto him was there no king before him,\nthat turned to the LORD with all his heart ... according to all the law\nof Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n CHAPTER XXXVI.\n\n\n =1\u20124= (= 1 Esdras i. 34\u201238; 2 Kings xxiii. 30b\u201234).\n THE REIGN OF JEHOAHAZ.\n\n \u00b9Then the people of the land took Jehoahaz the son of Josiah,\n and made him king in his father\u2019s stead in Jerusalem.\n\n=1.= _the people of the land took_] Compare xxvi. 1, xxxiii. 25.\n\n_Jehoahaz_] Called \u201cShallum\u201d in 1 Chronicles iii. 15; Jeremiah xxii. 11.\nHe was younger than Jehoiakim; verse 5.\n\n \u00b2Joahaz was twenty and three years old when he began to reign;\n and he reigned three months in Jerusalem.\n\n=2.= _in Jerusalem_] His mother\u2019s name is here omitted; compare xxxiii.\n1, 21, xxxiv. 1. According to 2 Kings xxiii. 32 (compare Ezekiel xix. 3,\n4) Jehoahaz \u201cdid evil.\u201d\n\n \u00b3And the king of Egypt deposed him at Jerusalem, and amerced the\n land in an hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold.\n\n=3.= _deposed him at Jerusalem_] The clause answers to 2 Kings xxiii.\n33, \u201cput him in bands at Riblah in the land of Hamath, that he might\nnot reign in Jerusalem.\u201d Perhaps we should read the same words in\nChronicles The Hebrew words for \u201cdeposed\u201d and \u201cput in bands\u201d are liable\nto be easily confused.\n\n_amerced_] Authorized Version _condemned_. For \u201camerce\u201d in the sense\nof \u201cfine,\u201d compare Deuteronomy xxii. 19; and for \u201ccondemn\u201d in the same\nsense see Amos ii. 8 (Authorized Version, \u201cfined\u201d Revised Version).\n\n_an hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold_] The land was\npoorer than in the days when Sennacherib had imposed a fine on Hezekiah\nof \u201cthree hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold\u201d\n(2 Kings xviii. 14).\n\n \u2074And the king of Egypt made Eliakim his brother king over Judah\n and Jerusalem, and changed his name to Jehoiakim. And Neco took\n Joahaz his brother, and carried him to Egypt.\n\n=4.= _changed his name to Jehoiakim_] This name is compounded with the\nDivine name Jehovah. Probably Neco made the new king swear fealty _by\nJehovah_, and then declared his official name to be Jehoiakim, in order\nthat he and his people might have something to remind them of the oath\nhe had taken. (_Eliakim_ = \u201cGod establishes\u201d; Jehoiakim = \u201c_Jehovah_\nestablishes.\u201d) The rendering of this verse in 1 i. 38 is due to\nmisreadings of the Hebrew.\n\n_took Joahaz ... to Egypt_] He died in Egypt; 2 Kings xxiii. 34;\nJeremiah xxii. 12.\n\n\n =5\u20128= (= 1 Esdras i. 39\u201242; 2 Kings xxiii. 36\u2012xxiv. 6).\n THE REIGN OF JEHOIAKIM.\n\n \u2075Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to\n reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem: and he did that\n which was evil in the sight of the LORD his God.\n\n=5.= _and he reigned eleven years_] So also in Kings. The statement,\nhowever, is lacking in 1 Esdras i. 39, so that it is a highly probable\ninference that the text of Chronicles has here been harmonised with\nKings; compare verse 15, and Introduction \u00a7\u00a03, p. xxii.\n\n_in Jerusalem_] The Chronicler omits his mother\u2019s name (compare verse\n2, note) and also the statement that he raised the indemnity imposed by\nNeco by means of a poll-tax (2 Kings xxiii. 35).\n\n_he did that which was evil_] Compare 2 Kings xxiii. 37; Jeremiah xxii.\n13\u201218, xxvi. 20\u201223, xxxvi. 1\u201232.\n\n \u2076Against him came up Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and bound\n him in fetters, to carry him to Babylon.\n\n=6.= _Nebuchadnezzar_] The correct form of his name is \u201cNebuchadrezzar\u201d\n(so generally in Jeremiah and Ezekiel); in the inscriptions\nNabu-kudurri-u\u1e63ur. The name is Assyrian and means \u201cO Nebo, defend\nthe crown\u201d (or \u201cthe boundary\u201d), Nebo being a god who was regarded as\nthe son of Marduk, the chief god of Babylon (compare Isaiah xlvi. 1).\nNebuchadrezzar reigned from 604\u2012561 B.C., and was succeeded by\nEvil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk). The only purely historical inscription\nrelating to his reign deals with a campaign in Egypt in 568 B.C.;\ncompare Jeremiah xliii. 11.\n\n_came up_] It seems probable that Nebuchadrezzar did not _in person_\ncome up against Jerusalem _at the end of Jehoiakim\u2019s reign_, nor in\nperson carry off any of the sacred vessels; it is likely moreover\nthat Jehoiakim was not carried to Babylon. The result of Jehoiakim\u2019s\nrebellion against Nebuchadrezzar was according to 2 Kings simply\nthat \u201cbands\u201d of Chaldeans and their allies invaded Judah. Probably\nJehoiakim\u2019s life and reign came to an end (_how_ we do not know;\ncompare Jeremiah xxii. 18, 19) during this petty warfare, and then\nthree months later, the main Chaldean army under Nebuchadrezzar\nhaving arrived, Jerusalem was taken, and Jehoiakim\u2019s son and successor\nJehoiachin was carried off with the golden vessels of the house of the\nLord to Babylon. The Chronicler seems to foreshorten the history at\nthis point.\n\n \u2077Nebuchadnezzar also carried of the vessels of the house of the\n LORD to Babylon, and put them in his temple\u00b9 at Babylon.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _palace_.\n\n=7.= _of the vessels_] There is no mention in 2 Kings of the removal\nof sacred vessels during Jehoiakim\u2019s reign. Some were carried off under\nJehoiachin, the rest under Zedekiah; 2 Kings xxiv. 13, xxv. 13\u201217.\nCompare last note.\n\n_in his temple_] So LXX.; 1 Esdras i. 39 [41]; Daniel i. 2. Note the\nmargin, \u201cin his palace.\u201d The Hebrew word (_heyk\u0101l_) is a loan-word;\nthe original (_ikallu_) is the ordinary word in Assyrio-Babylonian for\n\u201cpalace.\u201d\n\n \u2078Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations\n which he did, and that which was found in\u00b9 him, behold, they\n are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah: and\n Jehoiachin\u00b2 his son reigned in his stead.\n\n \u00b9 Or, _against_.\n\n \u00b2 In 1 Chronicles iii. 16, _Jeconiah_. In Jeremiah xxii. 24,\n _Coniah_.\n\n=8.= _that which was found in him_] i.e. his sin (in this context);\ncompare 1 Kings xiv. 13.\n\n_of Israel and Judah_] The LXX. (but not 1 Esdras) adds here \u201cAnd\nJehoiakim slept with his fathers, and was buried in the garden of Uzza\nwith his fathers.\u201d\n\n\n =9, 10= (= 1 Esdras i. 43\u201245; compare 2 Kings xxiv. 8\u201217).\n THE REIGN OF JEHOIACHIN.\n\nThe account given in 2 Kings contains much that is not given in\nChronicles and, in particular, many details of the first captivity of\nJudah.\n\n \u2079Jehoiachin was eight\u00b9 years old when he began to reign; and he\n reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that\n which was evil in the sight of the LORD.\n\n \u00b9 In 2 Kings xxiv. 8, _eighteen_.\n\n=9.= _Jehoiachin_] Called \u201cJeconiah,\u201d 1 Chronicles iii. 16, where see\nnote.\n\n_eight years_] So LXX. (B) of Chronicles and Esdras (B); but the\nnumber is probably corrupt for _eighteen_, so LXX. (A) of Chronicles\nand Esdras (A) and Hebrew and LXX. of 2 Kings xxiv. 8. It is possible\nthat the words \u201cand ten days\u201d in the latter part of the verse are a\nmisplaced fragment of an original _ben sh\u0115m\u014dneh \u2018esreh sh\u0101n\u0101h_, i.e.\n\u201ceighteen years old.\u201d\n\n_in Jerusalem_] The Chronicler here omits the king\u2019s mother\u2019s name\n(compare verse 2, note), though she was a person of some influence;\ncompare 2 Kings xxiv. 12; Jeremiah xxii. 24\u2012 26; and perhaps Jeremiah\nxiii. 18 (Revised Version).\n\n_he did that which was evil_] Compare Jeremiah xxii. 24; Ezekiel xix.\n5\u20129.\n\n \u00b9\u2070And at the return of the year king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and\n brought him to Babylon, with the goodly vessels of the house\n of the LORD, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and\n Jerusalem.\n\n=10.= _at the return of the year_] Compare 2 Samuel xi. 1 =\n1 Chronicles xx. 1, \u201cat the return of the year, at the time when kings\ngo out to battle.\u201d This would be in the spring.\n\n_brought him to Babylon_] Not the king only, but also certain leading\nmen and craftsmen and smiths (in number 3023) went into captivity\u2015\u2015so\nJeremiah lii. 28; compare Jeremiah xxiv. 1, and 2 Kings xxiv. 14 (where\nthe size of the deportation is magnified into \u201call Jerusalem save the\npoorest of the land\u2015\u2015even ten thousand captives\u201d).\n\n_Zedekiah_] A covenant-name like \u201cJehoiakim\u201d\u2015\u2015(verse 4, note); it seems\nto mean \u201cRighteousness of Jehovah\u201d; compare the significant title in\nJeremiah xxiii. 6, \u201cThe LORD is our Righteousness.\u201d Zedekiah\u2019s original\nname was \u201cMattaniah\u201d (i.e. \u201cgift of Jehovah\u201d); 2 Kings xxiv. 17.\n\n_his brother_] In 2 Kings (more accurately) \u201chis father\u2019s brother\u201d;\ncompare 1 Chronicles iii. 15, 16, notes.\n\n\n =11\u201219= (= 1 Esdras i. 46\u201256; compare 2 Kings xxiv. 18\u2012xxv. 21;\n Jeremiah xxxvii. 1\u2012xxxix. 8, lii. 1\u201227).\n REIGN OF ZEDEKIAH. DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM.\n\n \u00b9\u00b9Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign;\n and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem:\n\n=11.= _in Jerusalem_] The Chronicler omits, as usual, his mother\u2019s\nname. She was \u201cHamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah\u201d (2 Kings\nxxiv. 18), and was mother of Jehoahaz also (2 Kings xxiii. 31).\nJehoiakim was by a different mother (2 Kings xxiii. verse 36).\n\n \u00b9\u00b2and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD\n his God; he humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet\n _speaking_ from the mouth of the LORD.\n\n=12.= _humbled not himself_] Jeremiah consistently advised Zedekiah\nto submit to the Chaldeans; but the king partly through fear of his\nprinces, partly through illusive hopes, could never bring himself\nto do so; compare Jeremiah xxi. 1\u20127, xxxiv. 8\u201222, xxxvii. 1\u201210, 17,\nxxxviii. 17\u201223.\n\n \u00b9\u00b3And he also rebelled against king Nebuchadnezzar, who had made\n him swear by God: but he stiffened his neck, and hardened\u00b9 his\n heart from turning unto the LORD, the God of Israel.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _strengthened_.\n\n=13.= _who had made him swear by God_] Compare Ezekiel xvii. 11\u201219.\n\n \u00b9\u2074Moreover all the chiefs of the priests, and the people,\n trespassed very greatly after all the abominations of the\n heathen; and they polluted the house of the LORD which he had\n hallowed in Jerusalem.\n\n=14.= _polluted the house_] Jeremiah vii. 9\u201211, xxiii. 11\u201214; Ezekiel\nviii. 5\u201216.\n\n \u00b9\u2075And the LORD, the God of their fathers, sent to them by\n his messengers, rising up early and sending; because he had\n compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place:\n\n=15.= _rising up early and sending_] The words are absent from 1 Esdras\ni. 50, and are perhaps a late addition to Chronicles derived from\nJeremiah; compare Jeremiah xxvi. 5. See note on verse 5 above.\n\n \u00b9\u2076but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words,\n and scoffed at his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose\n against his people, till there was no remedy\u00b9.\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _healing_.\n\n=16.= _mocked the messengers_] Jeremiah was imprisoned, beaten, and\nthreatened with death, Urijah (Jeremiah xxvi. 20\u201223) was put to death.\nOf the fate of Habakkuk (who probably lived during the Chaldean period,\nHabakkuk i. 6) nothing is known.\n\n \u00b9\u2077Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldeans,\n who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their\n sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old\n man or ancient: he gave them all into his hand.\n\n=17.= _Chaldeans_] Their name in Hebrew is _Casdim_ and in\nAssyrio-Babylonian _Caldu_ (the change of \u201cs\u201d for \u201cl\u201d before a dental\nis not uncommon in the latter language). They were a people originally\nliving south of Babylon on the sea, but Nabopolassar, father of\nNebuchadrezzar, conquered Babylon and established a Chaldeo-Babylonian\nEmpire.\n\n_in the house of their sanctuary_] Compare Ezekiel\u2019s vision of the\nslaughter; Ezekiel ix. 1\u201211.\n\n \u00b9\u2078And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and\n the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the\n king, and of his princes; all these he brought to Babylon.\n\n=18.= _all the vessels_] i.e. all the vessels which remained after the\nprevious spoliation (verse 10). They were perhaps chiefly of brass;\ncompare 2 Kings xxv. 13\u201215.\n\n \u00b9\u2079And they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of\n Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and\n destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof.\n\n=19.= _brake down the wall_] The Hebrew verb here used (_nitt\u0113\u00e7_)\nimplies a more thorough breaking down than the _p\u0101ra\u1e63_ of xxv. 23\n(see note), xxvi. 6.\n\n\n =20, 21= (= 1 Esdras i. 57, 58).\n THE CAPTIVITY.\n\n \u00b2\u2070And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to\n Babylon; and they were servants to him and his sons until the\n reign of the kingdom of Persia:\n\n=20.= _to him and his sons_] Compare Jeremiah xxvii. 7. There were\nthree kings of Babylon after Nebuchadrezzar before Cyrus established\nPersian rule, viz. Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk) (2 Kings xxv. 27),\nNeriglissar (Nergal\u0161ar-u\u1e63ur), and Nabonidus (Nabu-na\u2019id). The last\ntwo kings were usurpers. Neriglissar was (it seems) son-in-law to\nNebuchadrezzar (Hommel, BABYLONIA in Hastings\u2019 _Dictionary of the\nBible_, 1. 229a, or Sayce in _Encyclopedia Britannica_\u00b9\u00b9, III. pp. 105,\n106). Whether Nabonidus was connected with the royal house is not known.\n\n \u00b2\u00b9to fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until\n the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: _for_ as long as she lay\n desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.\n\n=21.= _by the mouth of Jeremiah_] Compare Jeremiah xxv. 11, xxix. 10.\n\n_her sabbaths_] i.e. years, occurring every seventh year, when the land\nwas to be allowed a respite from cultivation; compare Leviticus xxv.\n1\u20127, xxvi. 34, 35.\n\n_threescore and ten years_] i.e. two whole generations. It is probable\nthat the Chronicler intended to suggest that the Sabbatical years had\nbeen neglected throughout the period (about 490 = 70 \u00d7 7 years) during\nwhich the kingdom lasted; but, if so, he treats the point somewhat\nloosely, not troubling about the objection that the reigns of the\nseveral God-fearing kings (David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat) would need to\nbe subtracted from this total, and that actually the number of violated\nSabbatical years would fall considerably below 70.\n\n\n =22, 23= (= Ezra i. 1\u20123a] 1 Esdras ii. 1\u20125a).\n CYRUS DECREES THE REBUILDING OF THE TEMPLE.\n\nThese verses are obviously inappropriate as the conclusion of\nChronicles, and their proper place is as the opening words of the\nbook of Ezra, _where also they are given_. Their exposition properly\nbelongs to the commentaries on Ezra or Esdras, to which accordingly the\nreader must be referred for fuller notes. These verses were retained\nhere when the separation of Ezra\u2012Nehemiah from Chronicles was made\n(see Introduction, \u00a7\u00a02), either through mere accident, or perhaps to\nindicate that Chronicles had originally formed one work with Ezra and\nNehemiah, but most probably in order to avoid a depressing termination\nto the book. This last point carries no small weight in view of the\nfact that in the Hebrew Bible Chronicles is the last book. It is\ninteresting to note that to avoid closing the book of Isaiah with the\nterrible verse (lxvi. 24) which is actually its conclusion, it was\ncustomary to repeat after verse 24 some hopeful words taken from verse\n23. Compare also the last verses of 2 Kings.\n\n \u00b2\u00b2Now in the first year of Cyrus\u00b9 king of Persia, that the\n word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished,\n the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he\n made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and _put it_\n also in writing, saying,\n\n \u00b9 Hebrew _Coresh_.\n\n=22.= _Cyrus king of Persia_] Cyrus, the Persian, was at first king\nof a small state in Elam, to the east of Babylonia. In 549 B.C.\nhe conquered the king of the Medes, and so became founder of the\nMedo-Persian Empire. In 546 B.C. he overthrew the famous Croesus,\nking of Lydia, and advancing against Babylon entered it after a short\nand easy campaign in 538 B.C.\u2015\u2015a career of meteoric brilliance. By\nhis \u201cfirst year\u201d is meant 537 B.C., his first year as ruler of the\nBabylonian Empire.\n\n_stirred up the spirit_] Compare 1 Chronicles v. 26; Haggai i. 14.\n\n_made a proclamation_] compare xxx. 5. The phrase is characteristic of\nthe Chronicler.\n\n \u00b2\u00b3Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the\n earth hath the LORD, the God of heaven, given me; and he hath\n charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah.\n Whosoever there is among you of all his people, the LORD his God\n be with him, and let him go up.\n\n=23.= _All the kingdoms of the earth_] The king of Babylon bore the\ntitle of \u201cking of the four quarters of the world.\u201d Cyrus succeeded to\nthis title on his conquest of Babylon.\n\n_let him go up_] i.e. to Jerusalem; compare Ezra i. 3. Since Chronicles\nis the last book according to the order of the Hebrew Canon, these\nencouraging words conclude the Hebrew Bible.\n\n\n\n\n INDEX\n\n\n Abiathar,\n 39 f., 102, 120, 142, 167\n\n Abib,\n 339\n\n Abijah,\n 218 ff.\n\n Abimelech (Ahimelech),\n 102, 120, 142\n\n _add\u012br\u012bm_,\n 273\n\n Adullam, the cave of,\n 81, 88, 211\n\n Adversary, the, _see_ Satan\n\n Ahab,\n 240 ff.\n\n Ahaz,\n 292 ff.\n\n Ahaziah (Jehoahaz),\n 263 ff., 284\n\n Akaba, the Gulf of,\n 202\n\n _Alamoth_, set to,\n 104\n\n Alexander the Great,\n xv, xix, xlix, 4\n\n Algum trees,\n 174, 204\n\n Aliens in Israel,\n 98, 120, 134, 173, 176, 312\n\n Altar of incense, the,\n 139, 162, 185, 289\n\n Altar-pillars,\n 83, 224, 313\n\n Amaziah,\n 279 ff.\n\n Ambushment,\n 223, 254\n\n Amen,\n 111, 115\n\n Amerce,\n 346\n\n Ammon, Ammonites,\n 121, 125 f., 249, 291 f.\n\n Amon, King of Judah,\n 329\n\n Anachronisms, \n 164 f., 261\n\n Anathoth,\n 84\n\n Angel,\n 130 f.\n\n Antonia, the Tower of,\n 163\n\n Apes,\n 206\n\n Arabians,\n 1, 238, 287;\n invasion by, 226, 262 f.\n\n Aram (= Syria),\n 9, 17, 119, 122\n\n Aramaic,\n 9, 321\n\n Ariel,\n 83\n\n Ark, the,\n 94 ff., 101 ff., 186 ff., 339\n\n Armourbearer,\n 74\n\n Asa,\n 223 ff.\n\n Asaph,\n 42 ff., 103, 107, 112, 145, 188\n\n Ascent of the sepulchres, the,\n 324\n\n Ashdod,\n 287\n\n Asherim (Ash\u0113rah, Ash\u0113rim, Ash\u0113roth),\n 224, 231, 237, 247, 277, 313, 320, 325 f., 331\n\n Ashtaroth (Ashtoreth),\n 49, 75\n\n Asshur-bani-pal,\n 6, 317, 327\n\n Assyria, Assyrians,\n 8 f., 297 ff., 316 ff., 327\n\n Assyrian monuments,\n 122, 206, 317, 320, 327\n\n Athaliah,\n 266 ff.\n\n Attent (=attentive),\n 194\n\n Augury,\n 325\n\n _\u2018az\u0101r\u0101h_,\n 184, 250 f.\n\n Azariah, another name for Uzziah,\n 23, 285\n\n Azariah the prophet,\n li, 228 ff.\n\n\n Baal (Baalim), use and disuse of the title,\n 22, 31, 59, 63, 180, 236, 275;\n the house of, 272;\n altars of, 325, 331\n\n Babylon,\n 327;\n kings of, 351\n\n B\u00e4deker, _Palestine_, referred to,\n 32, 34, 47, 50, 57, 96, 99, 119 f., 150, 199, 211, 231 ff.,\n 250, 264, 266, 287, 291, 297 f., 318, 320, 323\n\n Balsam trees,\n 100\n\n _b\u0101m\u014dth_,\n 231, 320\n\n _b\u0101n\u0101h_,\n 211\n\n Barnes, W. E., referred to,\n lx;\n (in _Expositor_), 78, 81;\n (in _Expository Times_), 118;\n (on Kings), 172, 185, 240, 285, 293, 322;\n (in _Journal of Theological Studies_), 180\n\n Bashan,\n 35\n\n _Bath_ (a measure for liquids),\n 175, 182\n\n Bearers,\n 173, 176\n\n Beauty of holiness,\n 110, 254\n\n Beer-sheba to Dan,\n 128, 308\n\n _b\u0115g\u0101dim_,\n 335\n\n Belial, sons of,\n 219\n\n Ben-hadad,\n 233\n\n Benzinger, I., referred to,\n xxxiii, 238, 307\n\n Beracah, valley of,\n 255\n\n Beth-Dagon,\n 75\n\n Beth-el,\n 57, 222\n\n Beth-horon,\n 49, 199\n\n Beth-shean (Beth-shan),\n 58, 75\n\n Beth-shemesh,\n 47, 283, 298\n\n Bezalel,\n 17, 170\n\n _b\u012br\u0101h_, _b\u012br\u0101niyy\u014dth_,\n 163, 238\n\n Bliss, Dr, _Excavations at Jerusalem_,\n 318 f.\n\n Boaz,\n 180\n\n Book of the law, _see_ Law\n\n Brasen altar, the,\n 180 f., 196, 201\n\n Brasen sea, the, _see_ Sea\n\n Brass,\n 118\n\n Brook of Egypt,\n 196\n\n Brother (= fellow-tribesman),\n 88\n\n Burning for the dead,\n 235, 263\n\n Burning of the dead,\n 76\n\n Burnt offerings,\n 106, 141, 195, 306, 313\n\n\n Cadytis,\n 344\n\n Cake of raisins,\n 107\n\n Caleb (Chelubai),\n 15 f., 19, 27\n\n Calebites,\n 16 ff., 19 f., 154\n\n Canaan,\n 6\n\n Candlesticks, the golden,\n 183\n\n Captivity, the,\n 351\n\n Caravans, halting stations of,\n 21\n\n Carchemish,\n 172, 344\n\n Carites, _see_ Cherethites\n\n Carmel,\n 85, 288\n\n Castles,\n 163, 238, 291\n\n Caterpillars,\n 192\n\n Causeway leading to the Temple,\n 150\n\n Cedars,\n 173 f., 207\n\n Census, David\u2019s,\n 31, 127 f., 155 f.\n\n Chaboras, the river,\n 122\n\n Chaldees, Chaldeans,\n 9, 350\n\n Chambers,\n 70 f., 315\n\n Champions, Philistine,\n 126 f.\n\n Chapiters (= capitals),\n 179, 184\n\n Chapman. _Introduction to the Pentateuch_,\n xiii _note_, 12, 338\n\n Chapmen,\n 204\n\n Chariot cities,\n 30, 171, 200, 206\n\n Chariots and horsemen,\n 122 f., 171, 206\n\n Cherethites (Carites),\n 120, 167, 267, 273\n\n Cherubim,\n 162, 178 f.\n\n Child-sacrifice,\n 293\n\n Choir,\n 138\n\n Chronicler, the, characteristic treatment of subjects by,\n xxxviii ff., 11, 25, 37, 38, 73, 77, 87, 92, 95, 97, 98, 100,\n 105, 106, 114, 117, 121, 124, 127, 128, 133, 153, 167, 173,\n 191, 195, 200, 214, 217, 218, 222, 223, 225, 229, 237, 238,\n 256, 274, 275, 276, 278, 280, 283, 284, 289, 292, 297, 300,\n 301, 308, 326, 330, 333, 352;\n facts omitted by, xliv f., 22, 33, 73, 76, 77, 106, 114, 116,\n 117, 121, 125, 126, 167, 173, 200, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211,\n 213, 223, 256, 273, 325, 329, 330, 346, 347, 348, 349\n\n Chronicles, the, relation of,\n to Ezra and Nehemiah, xvi f.;\n date and authorship of, xvii ff.\n contents of, xxiv ff.;\n the sources of, xxix ff.;\n the historical value of, xlii ff.;\n the religious value of, liv ff.;\n name and position of, in the Canon, lvi ff.;\n text and versions of, lviii f., and _see_ under \u201cText,\u201d;\n recent literature on, lix f.\n\n Cities, fortified,\n 211, 215, 224\n\n City of palm trees,\n 297\n\n Commandments, the Ten,\n 274\n\n Conaniah,\n 340\n\n Confection,\n 71\n\n Congregation,\n 163\n\n Coniah, _see_ Jeconiah\n\n Cook, S. A.,\n (on 1 Esdras), xxiii, xlvii, 339 f.;\n (in _Journal of Theological Studies_), xxxiv;\n (in _Encyclopedia Britannica_), xlvii, 52, 57;\n _Notes on Old Testament History_, 17;\n (in _Encyclopedia Biblica_), 19;\n (in _Expository Times_), 226, 258;\n (in _Jewish Quarterly Review_), 265\n\n Cornet,\n 105\n\n Coronation,\n 271\n\n Corv\u00e9e,\n 173\n\n Courts, the Temple,\n 183 f., 325\n\n Covenant,\n 77, 94, 113, 190, 219, 230, 336 f.\n\n Crete,\n 7\n\n Crown,\n 125, 270\n\n Cubit,\n 177\n\n Curtis, E. L.,\n _Chronicles_, referred to, xvii, xxi, xxxiv, lvi, lix, 16, 38,\n 45, 53 f., 67, 74, 102, 104 f., 138, 140, 152, 157, 187,\n 235, 276, 308, 332, 342\n\n Cush, Cushites,\n 6 f., 225 ff., 262\n\n Cyprus,\n 5\n\n Cyrus,\n xvi, xxiv _note_;\n rebuilding of the Temple decreed by, 351 f.\n\n\n D, or \u201cDeuteronomic\u201d narrative,\n xx, 338 f.\n\n _D_ and _R_ easily confused in Hebrew,\n 6, 250\n\n Damascus (Darmesek),\n 116, 118, 233, 298 f.\n\n Daric,\n xviii, 165\n\n Daughters, inheritance of,\n 139\n\n David, descent of,\n 14, 15;\n sons of, 21 f.;\n king over Israel, 76 f.;\n the city of, 77 f., 186, 207, 217;\n adherents of, in exile, 87 ff.;\n his dealings with the Ark, 94 ff., 101 ff., 105 f., 107;\n Psalm of praise of, 107 ff.;\n desires to build a Temple, 112 ff.;\n foreign wars of, 117 ff.;\n officials of, 120;\n numbers the people, 127 ff.;\n prepares for building the Temple, 133;\n charges of, to Solomon and to the princes, 133 ff., 158 ff.;\n organises Levites, 137 ff.;\n organises the priests, 141 ff.;\n organises the military and civil officials, 153 ff.;\n the blessing of, 165 f.\n\n _d\u0115bhash_,\n 314\n\n Debir,\n 47\n\n _d\u0115b\u012br_,\n 178, 180\n\n Demons (_jinn_),\n 213\n\n _Dhirr\u012bh_ (_Zirr\u012bh_),\n 226\n\n _dibs_,\n 314\n\n Dittography,\n 22, 49, 55, 58, 116, 318\n\n Doorkeepers (= Porters),\n xvi, 67 ff., 104 f., 137, 149 ff., 273\n\n Drachma,\n 165\n\n Drink offerings,\n 307\n\n Dukes of Edom,\n 13\n\n\n E, or \u201cElohistic\u201d narrative,\n xx\n\n Edom,\n 11 f., 119, 260, 281\n\n Egypt,\n 172\n\n Elephantine, Jewish Temple at,\n xxxviii\n\n Eliakim, _see_ Jehoiakim\n\n Elijah, writing of,\n 261\n\n En-gedi,\n 250\n\n Ephod,\n 106\n\n Ephraim,\n 56 f.\n\n Ephraimite mercenaries,\n 281\n\n Ephron (Ephrain),\n 222\n\n Eponymous ancestors,\n 3\n\n Erman, _Ancient Egypt_,\n 157, 209, 242\n\n Esar-haddon,\n 317, 327\n\n Esdrelon (Esdraelon),\n 74, 171, 345\n\n Ethan,\n 42 f., 103, 112, 145\n\n Ethanim,\n 186\n\n Ethiopia, Ethiopians,\n 6, 225 ff., 262\n\n Eunuch,\n 159, 241\n\n Euphemisms,\n 114, 258, 266, 277, 289\n\n Euphrates,\n 116 ff., 122, 206, 344\n\n Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk),\n 347, 351\n\n Ezekiel (Jehezkel),\n 143\n\n Ezion-geber,\n 202, 258\n\n\n Familiar spirits,\n 325\n\n Fasting,\n 76, 250\n\n Father (= eponymous ancestor),\n 18;\n as a title of honour, 175\n\n Fathers\u2019 houses,\n xvii, 34, 52\n\n Feast of dedication, the,\n 195 f.\n\n Feast of harvest, the, _see_ Feast of weeks\n\n Feast of tabernacles, the,\n 186, 196 f.\n\n Feast of unleavened bread, the,\n 310\n\n Feast of weeks, the,\n 230, 314\n\n Fir trees,\n 174\n\n Folds,\n 323\n\n Foreigners, _see_ Aliens\n\n Fortresses,\n 211, 224\n\n\n Gad the seer,\n 130, 168, 305\n\n Gates of the Temple,\n 68, 268 f., 272 f., 291\n\n Gehenna (G\u0113-ben-hinn\u014dm, G\u0113-hinn\u014dm),\n 293\n\n Genealogical Table of the Nations,\n 2 ff.\n\n Genealogies, a prominent feature in Chronicles,\n xvi, xlvii;\n the practical purpose of, 1 f.\n\n Genealogy, reckoning by,\n xvii, 35, 217\n\n Genesis, stylistic similarity of Chronicles to,\n 27\n\n Gezer,\n 49, 199 f., 224\n\n Giant,\n 126 f.\n\n Gibeon,\n 169, 171\n\n Gihon, the spring of,\n 323 f.\n\n Gilboa, campaign of,\n 73 f.\n\n Gilead,\n 17, 34 f.\n\n Gimirrai,\n 4\n\n Goliath,\n 126 f.\n\n Governor of the city,\n 332\n\n Governors,\n 205\n\n\n Habor,\n 37\n\n Hadarezer (= Hadadezer),\n 117, 124\n\n Hadoram (Adoram, Adoniram),\n 210\n\n Hagrites,\n 34, 36\n\n Hamath, entering in of,\n 96, 196;\n (= modern Hama), 117, 119\n\n Hamath-zobah,\n 199\n\n _\u1e25amman_\n 224\n\n Hanani the seer,\n 234\n\n Handcock, _Latest Light on Bible Lands_,\n 317, 320, 327\n\n Hanoch (\u1e24an\u00f4kh) (= Enoch),\n 2, 11, 33\n\n Harps,\n 96 f., 188\n\n _\u1e25\u0101\u1e63er_, _\u1e25\u0103\u1e63\u00ear\u00eem_,\n 31, 184, 250 f.\n\n _h\u0103\u1e63\u014d\u1e63\u0115r\u0101h_,\n 230\n\n Havvoth-Jair,\n 17 f.\n\n Heart, the, considered as the seat of the mind,\n 113, 189, 220\n\n Heaven,\n 296, 321\n\n _\u1e25ebel_,\n 108\n\n He-goats (= _jinn_),\n 213\n\n Heman,\n 42 f., 103, 112, 145, 188\n\n Hercules, the temple of (Melkart),\n 180\n\n Herodotus referred to,\n 4, 180, 317, 320, 344\n\n Heroes, list of,\n 79 ff.\n\n _h\u0113yk\u0101l_,\n 163, 348\n\n Hezekiah,\n 300 ff.;\n the great Passover of, 308 ff.;\n the prayer of, 321\n\n _\u1e25idoth_,\n 203\n\n High places,\n 169, 171, 223, 231, 236, 256, 320\n\n High-priests, list of the,\n 37 ff.\n\n Hilkiah the priest,\n 337 ff.\n\n Hinnom, the valley of the son of,\n 293, 325\n\n Hiram, _see_ Huram\n\n Hittites,\n 8, 172, 200\n\n Hivites,\n 8\n\n Hogarth, _Authority and Archaeology_,\n 317, 322, 327\n\n Hogg,\n (in _Encyclopedia Biblica_), 31;\n (in _Jewish Quarterly Review_), 60;\n (in _Expositor_), 308\n\n H\u00f6lscher, _Pal\u00e4stina_,\n xlviii, 20, 229, 309\n\n Holy of Holies, the,\n 161, 178, 183\n\n Holy place, the,\n 141, 177\n\n _\u1e25\u014dmer_,\n 175, 291\n\n Honey,\n 314\n\n Hooks, used by Assyrians,\n 327\n\n Horn, lift up the,\n 147\n\n Host of God, the,\n 91\n\n Host of heaven, the,\n 243, 325\n\n Houghed (= hamstrung),\n 117\n\n House (= dynasty),\n 114\n\n House of the forest of Lebanon,\n 205\n\n Houses of the Temple,\n 161, 164, 333\n\n _\u1e25\u014dzai_,\n 329\n\n Huldah, the prophecy of,\n 336\n\n Huram (artificer),\n 175, 184\n\n Huram (king),\n 98, 173 ff., 184, 198 f., 202\n\n\n Iddo,\n 207, 217, 223\n\n Idols, _see_ Asherim\n\n Incense,\n 201, 221, 289, 291\n\n Instruments, musical,\n 96 f., 138, 196, 305, 311\n\n Ionians,\n 4\n\n Isaiah,\n 290, 320 f.\n\n Israel,\n (= laymen), 64;\n (= the covenant-people), 210 f.\n\n\n J, or \u201cJahvistic\u201d narrative,\n xx, 2\n\n Jachin,\n 180\n\n Jahaziel, the prophecy of,\n 252 f.\n\n Jashar,\n the Book of, xi, 189\n\n Javan (= the Ionians),\n 4\n\n Jebusites,\n 8, 177, 200\n\n Jeconiah (Coniah, Jehoiachin),\n 23, 348 f.\n\n Jeduthun,\n 42, 112, 145, 188\n\n Jehoahaz, _see_ Ahaziah\n\n Jehoahaz (Shallum),\n 346 f.\n\n Jehoiachin, _see_ Jeconiah\n\n Jehoiada,\n 153, 273 f.\n\n Jehoiakim (Eliakim),\n 347 f.\n\n Jehoram,\n 258 ff.\n\n Jehoshaphat,\n xlix ff., 235 ff.\n\n Jehu the prophet,\n 246 f.\n\n Jerahmeel, Jerahmeelites,\n 18 f.\n\n Jeremiah,\n 345\n\n Jericho,\n 297\n\n Jeroboam,\n 208, 210, 218 ff.\n\n Jerome, St,\n lvi, lix, 338\n\n Jerusalem,\n 78, 171, 217;\n destruction of, 349 ff.\n\n Jezreel,\n 264\n\n _jih\u0101d_,\n 221\n\n Joab,\n 78 f., 119, 123, 125, 128 f.\n\n Joash, King of Israel,\n 282 f.\n\n Joash, King of Judah,\n 273 ff.\n\n Joppa (Jaffa),\n 176, 287\n\n Josephus,\n _Antiquities of the Jews_, xix, 5;\n _War of the Jews_, 277\n\n Josiah,\n 329 ff.;\n celebration of the Passover by, 310, 330, 339 ff.;\n lamentations for, 345 f.\n\n Jotham,\n 291 f.\n\n Jozabad,\n 340\n\n Justice, administration of,\n 171, 237, 247 f.\n\n\n Karnak, the temple of,\n 180, 214\n\n Kassite dynasty, the,\n 7\n\n _\u1e33\u0115d\u0113shim_,\n 331\n\n _\u1e33e\u1e63eph_,\n 247, 249, 277, 323\n\n Kidron, the brook,\n 231, 303\n\n King\u2019s friend, a title,\n 157\n\n _kinn\u014dr_,\n 97\n\n Kinship, traced through the mother,\n 16\n\n Kiriath-jearim,\n 94, 170\n\n Kiriath-sepher,\n 47\n\n Kirkpatrick,\n (on 1 Samuel), 99;\n (on Psalms), 110;\n (on 2 Samuel), 116, 120\n\n Kition,\n 5\n\n Kittel, R., referred to,\n xxxiii, lx, 238, 307, 316\n\n _kiyy\u014dr_,\n 190\n\n Knops,\n 182\n\n _\u1e33\u014dn\u0113n_,\n 345\n\n _k\u014dr_ (_k\u014dr\u012bm_),\n 175, 291\n\n Korah, Korahites,\n 43, 253 f.\n\n Koran, the, referred to,\n 197\n\n Ku\u00eb,\n 172\n\n\n Lachish,\n 260, 285, 319 f.\n\n Lamentations,\n 345 f.\n\n Lavers, the,\n 182\n\n Law, book of the,\n discovery of the, 332, 334, 337 ff.\n\n Leprosy,\n 289\n\n Levi, sons of,\n 37 ff.\n\n Levites,\n xvi, 51 f., 70, 186 f., 307, 312;\n the cities of the, 46 ff.;\n duties of the, 71 f., 140 f.;\n David\u2019s organisation of the, 137 ff.;\n families of the, 144 f.;\n help to cleanse the Temple, 303\n\n Levy,\n 173\n\n Libnah,\n 47, 260\n\n Libyans,\n 7, 215\n\n Lots, drawing of,\n 143, 148\n\n Lowland, _see_ Shephelah\n\n Lubim,\n 215, 226, 234\n\n Lydians,\n 7, 9\n\n\n Maacah,\n 56, 122\n\n Maacah (Micaiah),\n daughter of Absalom, 213 compare 218;\n Queen-mother, 230\n\n Macalister, R. A. S.,\n _The Philistines_, 7;\n _Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement_, 28, 31, 32;\n _The Excavation of Gezer_, 49;\n _Bible Side-lights from the Mound of Gezer_, 199, 224\n\n Machir,\n 17\n\n Magdolus,\n 344\n\n _m\u0101g\u0113n_, _m\u0101ginn\u014dth_,\n 205, 323\n\n Magog,\n 4\n\n Manasseh,\n 325 ff.;\n the prayer of, 328\n\n Mareshah,\n 225 ff., 258\n\n _ma\u1e63\u1e63\u0113b\u0101h_, _ma\u1e63\u1e63\u0113b\u014dth_\n 180, 224\n\n Meal-offering,\n 132, 141, 196\n\n Medes (Madai), the,\n 4\n\n Megiddo,\n 58, 266, 345\n\n _Megill\u014dth_,\n lvii\n\n Mesopotamia,\n 122\n\n Meunim,\n 32, 249, 251, 260, 287\n\n Micaiah, the prophecy of,\n 240 ff.\n\n Michal,\n 105 f.\n\n Midianites, the,\n 11\n\n _midrash_,\n xxxi _and note_, xlvi, xlix, 223, 279\n\n Midrashic narrative,\n characteristics of, xlix;\n in sources of Chronicles, xxxii;\n exemplified in Chronicles, 136, 217 f., 225, 239, 249, 294\n\n _migd\u0101n\u014dth_,\n 259, 323\n\n Millo,\n 79, 319\n\n _mishk\u0101n_,\n 94 f., 274\n\n _mishma\u2018ath_,\n 83\n\n _Mish\u014dr_,\n 288\n\n Mi\u1e63raim (= Egypt),\n 6, 19, 172\n\n _mizl\u0101g\u014dth_,\n 184\n\n _mizr\u0101\u1e33\u014dth_,\n 184\n\n Moab,\n 116 f.\n\n Moabites, invasion by,\n 249 f.\n\n Molech (Malcam, Milcom),\n 125, 293\n\n Mount Gerizim,\n Samaritan Temple on, xxi, xxxviii\n\n Mount Moriah,\n 176\n\n Mount Seir,\n 32, 251, 281\n\n Mount Zion,\n xxxviii f.\n\n Mulberry trees,\n 100\n\n Music, the Levitical service of,\n lii, 305 f.\n\n Musical guilds,\n xxiii, 145, 333\n\n Muski,\n 5\n\n Mu\u1e63ri,\n 19, 172\n\n\n Nabonidus (Nabu-na\u2019id),\n 344, 351\n\n Nabopolassar,\n 344, 350\n\n Nabulus,\n 49\n\n _n\u0101g\u012bd_,\n 33, 92, 295\n\n _na\u1e25al_,\n 252\n\n Names,\n significant, 24, 145 f.;\n lists of, in oriental Histories, 1 f., 79\n\n Nathan the prophet,\n 113, 168, 207, 305\n\n Navy,\n 206\n\n _n\u0113bhel_,\n 96 f.\n\n Nebuchadnezzar (Nebuchadrezzar),\n 347 f., 351\n\n Neco I and II,\n 327, 336, 343 f.\n\n _n\u0113r_ (_n\u012br_),\n 259\n\n Neriglissar (Nergal\u0161ar-u\u1e63ur),\n 351\n\n Nethinim,\n 65, 137\n\n New Testament (passages of) referred to:\n Matthew i. 3\u20126, 15\n Matthew i. 7, 23\n Matthew v. 22, 293\n Matthew v. 39, 244\n Matthew xxiii. 35, lviii, 277\n Matthew xxv. 15, 290\n Mark ii. 26, 102\n Mark ix. 43, 293\n Mark xi. 2, 7, 96\n Mark xvi. 1, 235\n Luke i. 5, 143\n Luke i. 7, 266\n Luke ii. 36, 335\n Luke iii. 31, 22\n Luke vii. 44\u201246, 297\n Luke xi. 51, 277\n Luke xii. 55, 192\n Luke xv. 18, 21, 296, 321\n Luke xix. 4, 172\n John i. 45, 16\n John iii. 27, 296\n John xi. 54, 222\n John xii. 3, 7, 235\n John xviii. 1, 303\n John xix. 39, 40, 235\n Acts vii. 60, 278\n Acts viii. 40, 287\n Acts ix. 32, 27\n Acts xii. 1, 228\n Acts xii. 21, 159\n Acts xii. 23, 222\n Acts xiii. 2, 138\n Acts xxi. 37, 163\n Acts xxii. 24, 163\n Romans i. 1, 138\n Romans xi. 2, xxxii\n Galatians i. 15, 138\n 2 Thessalonians ii. 11, 243\n 1 Timothy iii. 15, 114\n Hebrew ii. 16, 297\n 1 John i. 9, 215\n Revelation ii. 20, 335\n Revelation xxi, 12\u201216, 182\n\n Nimrod,\n 7\n\n Nineveh,\n 327\n\n Nisan, the first month,\n 89, 301, 310, 339\n\n Nobles, the,\n 273\n\n Numbering of the people, _see_ David\n\n Numbers high in Chronicles,\n xlix, 92, 133, 135 ff., 164 f., 178, 195, 204, 210, 218 f.,\n 221 f., 225 f., 239, 281, 294\n\n\n _\u014db_,\n 325\n\n Obelisk of Shalmaneser II,\n 122, 206\n\n Oblations (_t\u1d49r\u016bm\u0101h_)\n 314\n\n Obsolete English words:\n At (after verbs of asking), 241\n Grave (verb = carve), 174\n Magnifical, 134\n Play (= dance), 96, 106\n Polls (= heads), 137\n Skill (verb), 174, 333\n\n Oded,\n 229, 295 f.\n\n _\u014dhel_,\n 197, 274\n\n Omar, the Mosque of,\n 181\n\n _\u2018\u014dn\u0113n_,\n 325\n\n Onyx,\n 164\n\n Ophel,\n 291, 328\n\n Ophir,\n 164, 202, 257\n\n Oracle, the,\n 180, 185, 187\n\n Ornan,\n 131, 177\n\n Osorkon,\n 226\n\n Overseers,\n 173, 176, 333\n\n\n P, or \u201cPriestly\u201d narrative,\n xx, 2 f.\n\n _pa\u1e25\u014dth_,\n 205\n\n Palace, the,\n 163, 166\n\n Palmyra,\n 199\n\n Paphos, the temple of,\n 180\n\n Parbar,\n 151\n\n Parvaim,\n 178\n\n Passover, the,\n of Hezekiah, 308 ff.;\n of Josiah, 310, 320, 339 ff.\n\n Pelethites,\n 120, 167\n\n Pentateuch, the,\n xiv, xx, 238, 337 ff.\n\n Perfect heart, a,\n 93, 160, 165 f., 231, 248\n\n Pestilence,\n 130 f.\n\n Petrie, W. M. Flinders,\n _History of Egypt_, 226, 344\n\n Philistines,\n the original seats of the, 7;\n war with the, 74, 99 ff., 126, 286 f., 297;\n invasion by, 262 f.\n\n Phinehas,\n 69\n\n Ph\u0153nician language,\n 173\n\n Physicians,\n 235\n\n Pillar,\n 271\n\n Pillars (Jachin and Boaz),\n 179 f., 184\n\n Plague,\n 193\n\n Play on words,\n 15, 57, 254, 282\n\n Poll-tax,\n 274, 347\n\n Porch of the Temple,\n 177\n\n Porters, _see_ Doorkeepers\n\n Posts (= runners),\n 309\n\n Precious stones,\n 178\n\n Priesthood, the double,\n 102, 167\n\n Priests,\n 51 f., 303, 307, 312 ff.;\n courses of, 66;\n sons of the, 71;\n David\u2019s organisation of the, 141 ff.\n\n Princes of the sanctuary,\n 142\n\n Princes of the tribes of Israel,\n 155\n\n Prophetess,\n 335\n\n Psaltery,\n 96, 103, 146, 188, 204\n\n Psalms xcvi, cv, cvi,\n 107\n\n Pul,\n 34, 37\n\n Punt (Put),\n 6\n\n\n Rabbah,\n 121, 125\n\n Ramoth-gilead,\n 51, 240, 245\n\n Rechabites, the,\n 21\n\n Recorder (= chronicler),\n 120, 332\n\n Rehoboam,\n 211 ff.\n\n Rephaim,\n 126 f.;\n valley of, 81, 99\n\n Rhodians,\n 5\n\n River, the (= the Euphrates),\n 13, 206\n\n Robertson Smith, W.,\n _Old Testament in the Jewish Church_, 16;\n _Religion of the Semites_, 83, 180, 213, 219, 224\n\n Robinson\u2019s Arch,\n 150\n\n Ruler of the house of God, the,\n 66, 315, 340\n\n Ryle,\n _Genesis_, referred to, 2 f., 6;\n (on Ezra and Nehemiah), 143, 163, 273, 296, 334 f.;\n _Prayer of Manasses_, 328\n\n\n Sabbath,\n 351\n\n Sackcloth,\n 131\n\n Sacrifice,\n consumed by fire from heaven, 195;\n daily morning and evening, 141, 276;\n sevenfold, made by Hezekiah, 304;\n of thank offerings and burnt offerings, 306 f.;\n of peace offerings, 106, 132, 307, 328\n\n St Mary\u2019s Well,\n 323 f., 327\n\n Salt,\n covenant of, 219;\n the valley of, 119, 281\n\n Samaria,\n 266, 309\n\n Samaritan schism, the,\n xxi, xxxviii\n\n Samuel,\n the descent of, 41;\n the seer, 70, 168, 234\n\n Sargon,\n 309, 317\n\n Satan (= the Adversary),\n 128\n\n Saul,\n genealogy of, 62 f., 72;\n defeat, death and burial of, 73 ff.\n\n Saws,\n 126\n\n Scorpion,\n 209\n\n Scribe,\n 120, 142, 157\n\n Sea of the Temple, the,\n 119, 181 f., 184, 300\n\n Seer,\n 70, 168, 234\n\n Sennacherib, threatened invasion by,\n 316 ff.\n\n _s\u0113pher hatt\u014drah_,\n 338\n\n Septuagint, the, version of Chronicles,\n lviii f.\n\n Shalmaneser,\n 122, 206, 309\n\n Sharon,\n 35;\n the great maritime plain, 156\n\n Sheba,\n 6 f.;\n Queen of, 202 ff.\n\n _sh\u0113bhet_,\n 83\n\n Shechem,\n 48, 56, 207\n\n _shela\u1e25_,\n 270, 319\n\n _sh\u0115l\u0101\u1e6d\u012bm_,\n 118, 270\n\n Shemaiah,\n 210, 215\n\n Sheminith,\n set to the, 104\n\n _Sheph\u0113l\u0101h_,\n 156, 172, 207, 288, 298\n\n Shewbread,\n 71 f., 139, 141, 162, 174, 221, 304\n\n Shields of gold,\n 118, 205, 270, 323\n\n Shihor, brook of,\n 96\n\n Shishak, invasion by,\n 214 ff.\n\n Siloam, the Lower Pool of,\n 318\n\n Singers, the families of the,\n xvi, xlii, 38, 42, 104, 145 ff., 341\n\n _\u1e63innah_,\n 205\n\n _sippim_,\n 269\n\n Slings,\n 288\n\n Smith, G. A.,\n _Historical Geography of the Holy Land_, 74 f., 81, 83, 171,\n 184, 192, 207, 212, 226, 249 f., 255, 294, 297;\n _Jerusalem_, 78 f., 163, 288, 291, 318 f., 324, 327;\n (in _Encyclopedia Biblia_), 118;\n _Early Poetry of Israel_, 294\n\n Sojourners,\n 165 f.\n\n Solomon,\n 133 ff., 160 ff.;\n twice crowned, 167;\n great sacrifice of, 169 f.;\n vision of, 170 f.;\n horses and chariots of, 171 f.;\n makes preparations for building the Temple, 173 ff.;\n begins to build the Temple, 176 ff.;\n brings the Ark into the sanctuary, 186 f.;\n blessing and prayer of, 189 ff.;\n the night vision of, 197 f.;\n cities of, 198 ff.;\n arrangements of, for the Temple worship, 201 f.;\n the fleet of, 202;\n the greatness of, 204 ff.\n\n Sorcery,\n 325\n\n Spices,\n 204, 235\n\n Stir up the spirit,\n 37, 262, 352\n\n Store cities,\n 233, 238\n\n Strangers, _see_ Aliens\n\n Suburbs,\n 47, 95, 212, 316\n\n Sun-images,\n 224, 331\n\n Sycomore,\n 156, 172, 207\n\n Syria, Syrians,\n 9, 17, 116, 124;\n invasion by, 278\n\n Syriac Version, the,\n lix\n\n Syro-Ephraimite war, the,\n 294 f.\n\n\n Tabali,\n 5\n\n Tabernacle,\n 70, 94, 133, 274 f.\n\n Tabor,\n 50\n\n Tadmor,\n 199\n\n Tamar,\n 199\n\n _\u1e6daph_,\n 252\n\n Tarshish (= Tartessus),\n 5, 54, 205 f., 257 f.\n\n Tarsus,\n 5\n\n Task-work,\n 126, 134, 200\n\n Tekoa,\n 18, 26, 254\n\n Tell el-Amarna letters,\n 5, 58, 78, 121, 212\n\n Teman,\n 11\n\n Temple, the,\n gates of, 68, 268 f., 272 f., 291;\n David\u2019s preparations for building, 133 ff.;\n measurements of, 134, 177;\n the pattern of, 161 ff.;\n Solomon prepares to build, 173 ff.;\n description of, 176 ff.;\n dedication of, 186;\n restoration of, 274 ff.;\n cleansing of, 301 ff.;\n repair of, 332 ff.;\n Cyrus decrees the rebuilding of, 351 f.\n\n Tenderhearted,\n 220\n\n Tent,\n 69, 94, 101, 106, 186, 274\n\n _t\u0115r\u016b\u2018ah_,\n 106, 230\n\n _t\u0115r\u016bm\u0101h_,\n 314\n\n Testimony, the,\n 270 f., 274\n\n Text of Chronicles, the,\n xxii, lviii, 7, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, 27, 28, 35, 41, 42, 46, 49,\n 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 68, 82, 85, 115, 182, 214, 217, 227,\n 248, 255, 259, 323, 336\n\n Thistle (= thorn),\n 283\n\n Threshing-floor,\n 97, 131 f., 242\n\n Thucydides referred to,\n xlviii\n\n Tigris,\n 122\n\n Tilgath-pilneser (Tiglath-pileser),\n 34, 37, 292, 297 ff., 309\n\n Times (= changes, opportunities),\n 93, 168\n\n Tisri, the seventh month,\n 186\n\n Tithe,\n 313 f.\n\n Titus, Arch of,\n 230\n\n _t\u014drah_,\n 191, 228, 338\n\n Torrey, C. C.,\n _Ezra Studies_, xxxiii f., xlvi, lviii, lx, 38, 218, 237, 264 f.,\n 343, 345\n\n Treasuries, the,\n 161\n\n Trees, large,\n 76, 294\n\n Tree-worship,\n 224\n\n Trumpets, silver,\n 105, 112, 188, 196, 221, 230, 305\n\n Tyre,\n 5, 8, 134\n\n Tyrseni,\n 5\n\n\n Uriah,\n 86, 120\n\n Urim and Thummim,\n 99\n\n Uzziah,\n 285 ff.\n\n\n Valley of salt, the,\n 119, 281\n\n Veil of the Temple, the,\n 179\n\n Ventriloquism,\n 325\n\n Vessels of gold,\n 185 f.\n\n Vulgate, the,\n lix\n\n\n Wardrobe, keeper of the,\n 335\n\n Wellhausen, J., references to,\n lvi, lix, 20, 237, 271\n\n Wilson\u2019s Arch,\n 150\n\n Wrath,\n 247, 249, 277, 323\n\n\n Zadok,\n 39 f., 92, 102, 111, 142, 155, 167, 314\n\n Zechariah, martyrdom of,\n 277\n\n Zedekiah the king,\n 349 f.\n\n Zedekiah the prophet,\n 242, 244\n\n Zemaraim, the battle of,\n 218 ff.\n\n Zerah the Ethiopian,\n 225 f.\n\n Zidon, Zidonians,\n 8, 134\n\n Ziz,\n 252\n\n Zobah,\n 116 f., 122, 124, 199\n\n\n CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT\u00a0THE\u00a0UNIVERSITY\u00a0PRESS\n\n\n\n\n Illustration: WESTERN ASIA (EARLY TIMES)\n _Cambridge University Press._\n\n\n Illustration: (\u2021 Map of Israel)\n _Copyright_ \u00a0 _Cambridge University Press._\n\n\n Illustration: THE ENVIRONS OF JERUSALEM\n Cambridge University Press\n\n\n Illustration: JERUSALEM (Ancient)\n _Copyright_ \u00a0 _Cambridge University Press._\n\n\n\n\n The Cambridge University Press\n\n\n THE CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES\n\n GENERAL EDITORS:\n A. F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D., Dean of Ely\n R. ST JOHN PARRY, D.D., Fellow of Trinity College\n\n\n _With Introductions, Notes and Maps. Cloth. Extra fcap. 8vo._\n\n An Introduction to the Pentateuch. By the Rev. A.\u00a0T. CHAPMAN, M.A.\n 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Genesis. In the Revised Version. Edited by HERBERT E.\n RYLE, D.D. With 2 Maps and 5 Plates. 4s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Leviticus. In the Revised Version. Edited by A.\u00a0T.\n CHAPMAN, M.A., and A.\u00a0W. STREANE, D.D. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Exodus. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. S.\u00a0R.\n DRIVER, D.D. With 11 Illustrations and 4 Maps. 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Numbers. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0H.\n M\u1d9cNEILE, D.D. With 2 Maps. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Joshua. Edited by the Rev. G.\u00a0F. MACLEAR, D.D. With\n 2 Maps, 2s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Judges. Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0J. LIAS, M.A. With Map.\n 2s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Judges. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. G.\u00a0A.\n COOKE, D.D. With Map. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Ruth. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. G.\u00a0A.\n COOKE, D.D. 1s. _net_.\n\n The Books of Judges and Ruth. In the Revised Version. As above, in\n one volume, 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The First Book of Samuel. Edited by the Very Rev. A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK,\n D.D. With Map. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Second Book of Samuel. Edited by the Very Rev. A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK,\n D.D. With 2 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The First Book of the Kings. In the Authorised Version. Edited by\n the Rev. J.\u00a0R. LUMBY, D.D. With 3 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Second Book of the Kings. In the Authorised Version. Edited by\n the Rev. J.\u00a0R. LUMBY, D.D. With 3 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The First and Second Books of the Kings. In the Authorised Version.\n Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0R. LUMBY, D.D. In one vol. With 5 Maps.\n 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The First Book of the Kings. In the Revised Version. Edited by the\n Rev. W.\u00a0E. BARNES, D.D. With Map. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Second Book of the Kings. In the Revised Version. Edited by the\n Rev. W.\u00a0E. BARNES, D.D. With 2 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The First and Second Books of the Kings. In the Revised Version.\n Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0E. BARNES, D.D. In one vol. With 2 Maps.\n 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The First and Second Books of Chronicles. Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0E.\n BARNES, D.D. With 2 Maps. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Edited by the Right Rev. H. E. RYLE,\n D.D. With 3 Maps. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Esther. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0W.\n STREANE, D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Job. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0B. DAVIDSON, LL.D., D.D. 3s.\n _net_.\n\n The Psalms. Edited by the Very Rev. A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D.\n Book I. 1\u201241. 2s. _net_.\n Books II. and III. 42\u201289. 2s. _net_.\n Books IV. and V. 90\u2012150. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Proverbs. Edited by the Venerable T.\u00a0T. PEROWNE, B.D.\n 2s. _net_.\n\n Ecclesiastes; or, the Preacher. Edited by the Very Rev. E.\u00a0H.\n PLUMPTRE, D.D. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Song of Solomon. Edited by the Rev. ANDREW HARPER, D.D.,\n Edinburgh. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n Isaiah. Volume I. Chapters I\u2012XXXIX. Edited by the Rev. J. SKINNER,\n D.D. With Map. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n Isaiah. Volume II. Chapters XL\u2012LXVI. Edited by the Rev. J. SKINNER,\n D.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Book of Jeremiah together with the Lamentations. In the Revised\n Version. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0W. STREANE, D.D. With Map. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Book of Ezekiel. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0B. DAVIDSON, D.D. 3s.\n _net_.\n\n The Book of Daniel. Edited by the Rev. S.\u00a0R. DRIVER, D.D. With\n Illustrations, 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n Hosea. Edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Books of Joel and Amos. By the Rev. S.\u00a0R. DRIVER, D.D. Adapted\n to the text of the Revised Version, with a few supplementary notes,\n by the Rev. H.\u00a0C.\u00a0O. LANCHESTER, M.A. With Illustrations. 2s. 6d.\n _net_.\n\n Obadiah and Jonah. Edited by the Venerable T.\u00a0T. PEROWNE, B.D. 1s.\n 6d. _net_.\n\n Micah. Edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D. 1s. _net_.\n\n Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0B. DAVIDSON,\n LL.D., D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. Edited by the Venerable T.\u00a0T. PEROWNE,\n B.D. 2s. _net_.\n\n\n _The New Testament complete_\n\n The Gospel according to St Matthew. Edited by the Rev. A. CARR, M.A.\n With 2 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St Mark. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n With 4 Maps. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St Luke. Edited by the Very Rev. F.\u00a0W.\n FARRAR, D.D. With 4 Maps. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St John. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n With 4 Maps. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by the Rev. J. RAWSON LUMBY, D.D.\n With 4 Maps. 3s. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Romans. Edited by the Right Rev. H.\u00a0C. G. MOULE,\n D.D. With Map. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by the Rev. J. J. LIAS,\n M.A. With 2 Maps. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER,\n D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Galatians. Edited by the Rev. A. LUKYN WILLIAMS,\n B.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Ephesians. Edited by the Right Rev. H.\u00a0C. G.\n MOULE, D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Philippians. Edited by the Right Rev. H. C.\u00a0G.\n MOULE, D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon. Edited by the Right Rev.\n H.\u00a0C.\u00a0G. MOULE, D.D. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles to the Thessalonians. Edited by the Rev. G. G. FINDLAY,\n D.D. With Map. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles to Timothy and Titus. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0E.\n HUMPHREYS, M.A. With Map. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Hebrews. Edited by the Very Rev. F.\u00a0W. FARRAR,\n D.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle of St James. Edited by the Very Rev. E.\u00a0H. PLUMPTRE, D.D.\n 1s. _net_.\n\n The Epistles of St Peter and St Jude. Edited by the Very Rev. E.\u00a0H.\n PLUMPTRE, D.D. 2s. _net_.\n\n The Epistles of St John. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D. 2s.\n _net_.\n\n The Revelation of St John the Divine. Edited by the Rev. WILLIAM\n HENRY SIMCOX, M.A. 2s. _net_.\n\n * * * * *\n\n The Book of Psalms. With Introduction and Notes by the Very Rev.\n A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK, D.D. Crown 8vo, cloth, gilt top. 6s. _net_.\n\n The edition of the Psalms prepared by Dr Kirkpatrick for\n the \u201cCambridge Bible for Schools\u201d having been completed and\n published in three volumes, the whole work is now also published\n in a single volume. The page is larger than in the separate\n volumes, and, a thinner paper being used, this edition will be\n found convenient in size, and it is thought that many readers\n will prefer it to the separate volumes.\n\n * * * * *\n\n The Wisdom of Solomon. In the Revised Version. Edited by the Rev.\n J.\u00a0A.\u00a0F. GREGG, M.A. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach or Ecclesiasticus. In the\n Revised Version. Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0O.\u00a0E. OESTERLEY, D.D. 6s.\n _net_.\n\n The First Book of Maccabees. In the Revised Version. By the Rev.\n W. FAIRWEATHER, M.A. and J. SUTHERLAND BLACK, LL.D. With Map and\n Illustrations. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n * * * * *\n\n _In preparation_ (completing the series of the books of the Old\n and New Testaments)\n\n Deuteronomy. Edited by the Rev. G. ADAM SMITH, D.D., Professor\n of Old Testament Language, Literature and Theology, United Free\n Church College, Glasgow.\n\n\n THE REVISED VERSION FOR SCHOOLS\n\n _Edited with Introductions, Notes and Maps.\n Fcap. 8vo. 1s. 6d.. net each._\n\n The Book of Judges. Edited by the Rev. H. C.\u00a0O. LANCHESTER, M.A.\n\n The Book of Joshua. Edited by the Rev. P.\u00a0J. BOYER, M.A.\n\n The First Book of Samuel. Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0O.\u00a0E. OESTERLEY, D.D.\n\n The Second Book of Samuel. Edited by the Rev. R.\u00a0O. HUTCHINSON, M.A.\n\n The First Book of the Kings. Edited by the Rev. H.\u00a0C.\u00a0O. LANCHESTER,\n M.A.\n\n The Second Book of Kings. Edited by the Rev. G.\u00a0H. BOX, M.A.\n\n Isaiah I\u2012XXXIX. Edited by the Rev. C.\u00a0H. THOMSON, M.A., and the Rev.\n JOHN SKINNER, D.D.\n\n Isaiah XL\u2012LXVI. Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0A.\u00a0L. ELMSLIE, M.A., and the\n Rev. JOHN SKINNER, D.D.\n\n St Matthew. Edited by the Rev. A. CARR, M.A.\n\n St Mark. Edited by Sir A.\u00a0F. HORT, Bart., M.A., and MARY DYSON HORT\n (Mrs George Chitty).\n\n St Luke. Edited by the Rev. E. WILTON SOUTH, M.A.\n\n St John. Edited by the Rev. A. CARR, M.A.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by the Rt Rev. C. WEST-WATSON, D.D.\n\n The First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Edited by the Rev.\n S.\u00a0C. CARPENTER, M.A.\n\n The Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans. Edited\n by the Rev. H.\u00a0W. FULFORD, M.A.\n\n The Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and to\n Philemon. Edited by the Rev. W.\u00a0K. LOWTHER CLARKE, M.A.\n\n The Epistles to the Thessalonians, Timothy and Titus. Edited by the\n Rev. H.\u00a0W. FULFORD, M.A.\n\n The General Epistle of James and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Edited\n by the Rev. A. CARR, M.A.\n\n The Epistles of Peter, John and Jude. Edited by the Rev. CLAUDE M.\n BLAGDEN, M.A.\n\n The Revelation of St John the Divine. Edited by the Rt Rev. G.\u00a0H.\u00a0S.\n WALPOLE.\n\n\n THE SMALLER CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS\n\n Revised and enlarged edition\n\n _With Introductions, Notes and Maps. 1s.\u00a0net\u00a0each_.\n\n The Book of Joshua. Edited by J. SUTHERLAND BLACK, LL.D.\n\n The Book of Judges. Edited by J. SUTHERLAND BLACK, LL.D. And The\n Book of Ruth. Edited by the Rev. A.\u00a0W. STREANE, D.D. In one volume.\n\n The First Book of Samuel. Edited by the Very Rev. A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK,\n D.D.\n\n The Second Book of Samuel. Edited by the Very Rev. A.\u00a0F. KIRKPATRICK,\n D.D.\n\n The First Book of the Kings. Edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0H. HENNESSY, M.A.\n\n The Second Book of the Kings. Edited by the Rev. T.\u00a0H. HENNESSY, M.A.\n\n The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Edited by the Right Rev. HERBERT\n EDWARD RYLE, D.D.\n\n The Book of Proverbs. Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0R. COATES, B.A.\n\n The Books of Joel and Amos. Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0C.\u00a0H. HOW, M.A.\n\n The Gospel according to St Matthew. Edited by the Rev. A. CARR, M.A.\n\n The Gospel according to St Mark. Edited by the Rev. G.\u00a0F. MACLEAR,\n D.D.\n\n The Gospel according to St Luke. Edited by the Very Rev. F.\u00a0W.\n FARRAR, D.D.\n\n The Gospel according to St John. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by the Rev. H.\u00a0C.\u00a0O. LANCHESTER,\n M.A.\n\n * * * * *\n\n The Gospel according to St Mark. The Greek Text. Edited with\n Introduction and Notes for Beginners by Sir A.\u00a0F. HORT, Bart., M.A.\n With 2 Maps. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St Luke. The Greek Text. Edited with\n Introduction and Notes for Beginners by the Rev. W.\u00a0F. BURNSIDE,\n M.A. With 2 Maps. 3s. _net_.\n\n _In preparation, uniform with the above._\n\n The Acts of the Apostles, in Greek for beginners.\n\n\n THE CAMBRIDGE GREEK TESTAMENT FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES\n\n GENERAL EDITOR: R. ST JOHN PARRY, D.D.\n _With Introductions, Notes and Maps. Extra fcap. 8vo, cloth_\n\n The Gospel according to St Matthew. Edited by the Rev. ARTHUR CARR,\n M.A. 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St Mark. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n 4s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St Luke. Edited by the Very Rev. F.\u00a0W.\n FARRAR, D.D. 4s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Gospel according to St John. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n 4s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles. Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0R. LUMBY, D.D. 4s.\n 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Romans. Edited by R. ST J. PARRY, D.D. 3s. 6d.\n _net_.\n\n The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by the Rev. J. J. LIAS,\n M.A. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER,\n D.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Galatians. Edited by the Rev. A. LUKYN WILLIAMS,\n B.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Ephesians. Edited by the Rev. J.\u00a0O.\u00a0F. MURRAY,\n D.D. 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Philippians. Edited by the Right Rev. H. C.\u00a0G.\n MOULE, D.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon. Edited by the Rev. A.\n LUKYN WILLIAMS, B.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles to the Thessalonians. Edited by the Rev. GEORGE G.\n FINDLAY, D.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Pastoral Epistles. Edited by the Very Rev. J.\u00a0H. BERNARD, D.D.\n 3s. _net_.\n\n The Epistle to the Hebrews. Edited by the Very Rev. F.\u00a0W. FARRAR,\n D.D. 3s. _net_.\n\n The General Epistle of St James. Edited by the Rev. ARTHUR CARR, M.A.\n 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The First Epistle General of St Peter. Edited by the Very Rev. G.\u00a0W.\n BLENKIN, M.A. 3s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Second Epistle General of St Peter and the General Epistle of\n St Jude. Edited by M.\u00a0R. JAMES, Litt.D. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Epistles of St John. Edited by the Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D. 3s. 6d.\n _net_.\n\n The Revelation of St John the Divine. Edited by the late Rev.\n WILLIAM HENRY SIMCOX, M.A. Revised by G.\u00a0A. SIMCOX, M.A. 4s. 6d.\n _net_.\n\n The Cambridge Companion to the Bible. Containing the Structure,\n Growth, and Preservation of the Bible, Introductions to the\n several Books, with Summaries of Contents, History and Chronology,\n Antiquities, Natural History, Glossary of Bible Words, Index of\n Proper Names, Index of Subjects, Concordance, Maps, and Index of\n Places.\n\n Pearl Type, 16mo. from 1s. net; Ruby Type, 8vo. from 2s. 6d.;\n Nonpareil Type, 8vo. from 3s. 6d.; Long Primer Type, 8vo. 5s., or\n without Concordance, 4s. 6d.\n\n A Concise Bible Dictionary, based on the Cambridge Companion to the\n Bible, and containing a Bible Atlas consisting of 8 maps, and a\n complete Index.\n\n Crown 8vo. 1s. net. (Post free, 1s. 3d.)\n\n The Concise Bible Dictionary is based upon the Cambridge\n Companion to the Bible, the principal materials, which in the\n Companion are presented as a number of articles, written by\n different scholars, being rearranged in the form of a brief\n dictionary.\n\n The History of the English Bible. By JOHN BROWN, D.D. Royal 16mo.\n With 10 plates. 1s. net in cloth, 2s. 6d. net in lambskin.\n\n The Bible of To-Day. By the Rev. ALBAN BLAKISTON, M.A. Demy 8vo. 3s.\n _net_.\n\n A Short History of the Hebrews to the Roman Period. By R.\u00a0L. OTTLEY,\n D.D. Crown 8vo. With seven maps. 5s.\n\n The Religion of Israel. A Historical Sketch. By R.\u00a0L. OTTLEY, D.D.\n Second edition. Crown 8vo. 4s.\n\n A Short Syntax of New Testament Greek. Second Edition. By the Rev.\n H.\u00a0P.\u00a0V. NUNN, M.A. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. _net_.\n\n The Elements of New Testament Greek. By the same author. 3s. _net_.\n Key. 2s. _net_.\n\n Scripture Teaching in Secondary Schools. Papers read at a Conference\n held in Cambridge 10\u201213 April, 1912. First Year. Edited by N.\u00a0P.\n WOOD, M.A., B.D. With a Preface by F.\u00a0C. BURKITT, M.A., F.B.A.\n Crown 8vo. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n Scripture Teaching in Secondary Schools. A Report of a Conference\n held at Oxford 22\u201223 April, 1913. Second Year. Edited by H.\n CRADOCK-WATSON, M.A. Crown 8vo. 1s. 6d. _net_.\n\n\n CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS\n C. F. CLAY, MANAGER\n LONDON: FETTER LANE, E.C.\n EDINBURGH: 100, PRINCES STREET","title":"The books of Chronicles : $b With maps, notes and introduction","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":182396}