INTRODUCTION.

i. TITLE AND DIVISIONS, DATE, AUTHOR, CANONICITY AND SOURCES OF THE BOOKS OF KINGS.

(a) WHAT we name 1 and 2 Kings was anciently only one book, called by the Jews 'the Book of Kings.' It was broken into two parts by the Greek translators of the Septuagint, who did the same by the book of Samuel and the book of Chronicles, which also at first were both single books. The division between 1 and 2 Kings is made in the middle of the short reign of Ahaziah, king of Israel, a severance which would never have been made by the compiler. Having made two parts out of Samuel, and two out of the Kings, the Greek translators named the four portions thus formed, the first, second, third and fourth books of the kingdoms, or, of the kings. The Latin versions followed the divisions, but not the names, of the Greek. The two portions of Samuel, they called 1 and 2 Samuel, and our books 1 and 2 Kings. Jerome though he knew that each of these pairs was but one book, did not attempt to change titles which had been so long accepted1. And the whole of the Western Church has followed the Vulgate.

The Jews did not for many centuries adopt the division which had thus become current among Christians. They were led to do so at last for readiness of reference in the frequently recurring controversies between the Christians and themselves. The earliest adoption by the Jews of the Christian chapters in

1 On this see Jerome's preface to the Books of Samuel and Kings.

the Old Testament has generally been attributed to Rabbi Isaac Nathan, who began a Concordance in 1437. But in the Cambridge University Library there is a Hebrew MS.1, of at least a century earlier date, in which the Christian divisions are marked all the way through. Into printed Hebrew Bibles they were introduced by Daniel Bomberg in 1518.

(b) To the date of the compilation of the Book of Kings we are guided by the latest events that are mentioned in it. The last chapter (2 Kings xxv.) concludes with the 37th year of Jehoiachin's captivity, when Evil-Merodach released him from prison, This happened B. C. 562. But this last chapter and a few verses 18-20 of chapter xxiv. are identical with chapter lii. of the prophecy of Jeremiah. There however the closing words of chapter li. 'Thus far are the words of Jeremiah' plainly shew that what follows was added by one who thought it no integral part of the prophecy, but added it to complete the historical notices found in other parts of that book, and added it most likely from this book of Kings. We may therefore conclude that this book was compiled after B. C. 562. But the compiler has no word, even of hope, to record concerning the final deliverance of the nation from captivity. That deliverance commenced with the decree of Cyrus, B.C. 536, though the final migrations did not take place till the days of Nehemiah nearly a century later, B. C. 445. Had he known of any movement in the direction of a return, the compiler of Kings would surely have made mention of it. He is cheered, apparently, at the close of his work, by the clemency shewn to Jehoiachin. He would hardly have passed over any agitation for the national redemption without a word of notice. The book was therefore finished before B. C. 536, and its date lies between that year and B. C. 561.

(c) Who the compiler was we have no means of deciding. The Jewish tradition2 ascribes it to Jeremiah. But this is exceedingly improbable. The closing events recorded took place in Babylon. But at the overthrow of Jerusalem, Jeremiah

1 No. 13. See Catalogue of Heb. MSS. by Dr Schiller-Szinessy, P. 17T. B. Baba Bathra 15a.

2

was carried by the anti-Babylonian faction into Egypt (Jer. xliii. 6, 7) and after his arrival there we know not what befel him. His outspoken prediction, however, of evils to come on Egypt and on those who sought shelter there was not likely to go unpunished by the Jews who had brought him with them. Jewish writings1 speak of his escape to Babylon. But the statement is merely an opinion in support of the current tradition. Nothing whatever is known of his fate, and there is no ground whatever, beyond tradition, for supposing him to have been the compiler of the Kings.

(d) In the Hebrew Bible the book stands as part of the division called by the Jews 'the Earlier Prophets.' From the Jews it was received into the Christian Canon, and there has never been any question about its acceptance.

(e) The compiler specifies three sources from which his narrative is drawn:

(1) The Book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kings xi. 41) as the authority for Solomon's reign.

་

(2) The Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah, mentioned fifteen times: for the acts of Rehoboam (1 Kings xiv. 29); of Abijam (xv. 7); of Asa (xv. 23); of Jehoshaphat (xxii. 45); of Joram (2 Kings viii. 23); of Joash (xii. 19); of Amaziah (xiv. 18); of Azariah (xv. 6); of Jotham (xv. 36); of Ahaz (xvi. 19); of Hezekiah (xx. 20); of Manasseh (xxi. 17); of Amon (xxi. 25); of Josiah (xxiii. 28) and of Jehoiakim (xxiv. 5).

(3) The Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel, quoted seventeen times: in the history of Jeroboam, the son of Nebat (1 Kings xiv. 19); of Nadab (xv. 31); of Baasha (xvi. 5); of Elah (xvi. 14); of Zimri (xvi. 20); of Omri (xvi. 27); of Ahab (xxii. 39); of Ahaziah (2 Kings i. 18); of Jehu (x. 34); of Jehoahaz (xiii. 8); of Joash (xiii. 12); of Jeroboam II. (xiv. 28); of Zachariah (xv. 11); of Shallum (xv. 15); of Menahem (xv. 21); of Pekahiah (xv. 26); and of Pekah (xv. 31).

1 Seder Olam Rabba 20.

We have but to turn to the Books of Chronicles to find out the character of the writings to which these three general titles are given. The Chronicler adheres so closely to the language of Kings throughout the history of Solomon, that a comparison at once convinces us that he drew his narrative from the same documents as the earlier compiler. But he (2 Chron. ix. 29) describes his authorities as 'the Book' (R. V. history) 'of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the seer.'

We find here the key to the origin and character of all the three sources of information accessible to the compiler of Kings. 'The Book of the acts of Solomon' comprised three works written by prophets contemporary with Solomon, and which, embracing the whole period of his reign, were naturally soon gathered into one treatise, and called by one collective name. The prophetic spirit and the religious drift of all we read in the history is thus accounted for. In the notes it has been remarked that the whole purpose of the narrative is to picture Solomon's life a success, and the building of the Temple as acceptable, in so far only as the one was led in the fear of Jehovah, and the other stood as a token of obedience to the divine will; and that when Solomon's decline began, it is God who is represented as raising up the adversaries against him. A record of such a character is the composition of no mere historiographer, but bears on the face of it the imprint of prophetic hands.

When we turn to the second authority which the compiler quotes, 'the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah' and compare with it the works cited by the Chronicler, the same conclusion is arrived at. 'The Book' (R. V. histories) 'of Shemaiah the prophet and Iddo the seer' are quoted by him (2 Chron. xii. 15) as containing the events of the reign of Rehoboam, and his narrative, drawn from thence, is practically identical with the record in Kings. The same may be said concerning Abijam's reign, for which the Chronicler refers (2 Chron. xiii. 22) to 'the story' (R. V. commentary) of the prophet Iddo.' The authority which he gives for Jehoshaphat's

reign (2 Chron. xx. 34) is 'the Book' (R. V. history) 'of Jehu, the son of Hanani.' And after this reference a sentence follows, translated in R. V. thus: 'which is inserted in the Book of the kings of Israel1.' This is precisely the explanation to which all the evidence tends. The prophets wrote their several books, and as time went on they were taken up, and included in the large collection which at last acquired the title 'the Book of the Chronicles of the kings of Israel (or Judah).' We find it noticed further (2 Chron. xxvi. 22) that Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz was the writer of the history of Azariah (Uzziah), and also (2 Chron. xxxii. 32) of the acts and good deeds of Hezekiah. But here again it is stated expressly that 'the vision of Isaiah' is included in 'the Book of the kings of Judah and Israel.' Once more concerning Hezekiah's son, Manasseh, the Chronicler tells us that his acts are to be found partly 'in the Book of the kings of Israel' (2 Chron. xxxiii. 18) and in the following verse, that other things concerning him are written in the history of Hozai' as the R. V. renders, but the LXX., which the A. V. follows, translated 'among the sayings of the seers.'

With regard to the other kings, whose history is recorded in Chronicles, the writer is content with referring to 'the Book of the kings of Judah and Israel,' as he does (2 Chron. xvi. 11) for Asa, and (2 Chron. xxv. 28) for Amaziah, and (2 Chron. xxviii. 26) for Ahaz; or, with the names of the kingdoms in reverse order, to 'the Book of the kings of Israel and Judah,' as (2 Chron. xxvii. 7) for Jotham, (2 Chron. xxxv. 27) for Josiah, and (2 Chron. xxxvi. 8) for Jehoiakim. In one case, that of Joash, (2 Chron. xxiv. 27) he merely calls his authority 'the story' (R. V. commentary) 'of the book of the kings.' The three modes of reference last mentioned seem to indicate that before the Chronicler undertook his work, the process of combination had gone on so far as to convert all these separate 'commentaries,' 'histories,' 'visions,' and 'stories' into one compre

1 The A. V. gave for this clause 'who is mentioned in the Book of the kings of Israel,' but on the margin was added the literal rendering of the Hebrew was made to ascend,' which when applied to the book and not to the person intimates what is now expressed in R. V.